Re: [Swig-devel] Java director:except other comments

[William S F. <ws...@fu...>]

On 14/03/13 14:03, Marvin Greenberg wrote:
> On 14/Mar 3:48 AM, William S Fulton wrote:
>> On 12/03/13 20:39, Marvin Greenberg wrote:
>>>
>> Yes, as I mentioned I feared I had overlooked something :( The
>> consequence is actually much wider because by default absolutely no
>> wrapped C++ types are derived from Throwable, not even the SWIG
>> generated proxy classes. The javabase or javainterfaces typemap can of
>> course change the default base though. Hence the default
>> directorthrows typemaps cannot convert the Java exception to a
>> suitable C++ type to throw. So I think the default should be:
> I don't have any problem with no default in this case.  It was one of
> :-) my earlier proposed solutions.
There have been a few iterations in the design. Getting a good default, 
that is sensible across multiple languages and is flexible and not too 
hard to change behaviour from the default is challenging. I don't think 
we are quite at the correct balance yet, but hopefully getting closer.

> The normal swig wrapping of classes
> works fine for exceptions EXCEPT that you must ensure to add the
> appropriate javabase typemap. If you are doing anything with exceptions
> in Java, you'll have had to do this. But having a warning is fine.   It
> is easy enough to write the requisite typemaps for a few exceptions.  I
> still think that $1_typepath would be useful for this.
I don't understand why this is being proposed when the 
$package/$javaclassname approach is already in use. Is $1_typepath 
different enough to warrant another special variable? What's the difference?

William