Re: [Swig-devel] Re: Wrapping operator++ in C#

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

Olly Betts wrote:
> On 2005-12-21, William S Fulton <ws...@fu...> wrote:
>>There is no differentiation between prefix and postfix in C#. Also in C# 
>>the method is static and it takes different parameters.
> 
> Ah, I'd not spotted the difference with static and parameters.  I was
> under the misaprehension that C# effectively just needed the prefix C++
> version.
> 
>>So morphing the C++ declaration into a C# one isn't so natural. The
>>easiest approach is to just add in the correct C# declaration into
>>your C# class as such:
>>
>>%rename(operator_plus_plus) operator ++;
>>%typemap(cscode) Op %{
>>   public static Op operator++(Op op) {
>>     return op.operator_plus_plus();
>>   }
>>%}
> 
> Good plan - that'll do nicely.  Might be worth adding this idea to the
> manual.
> 
>>You should be able to make the generated/renamed function private with:
>>
>>%csmethodmodifiers operator++ "private";
> 
> To stop people calling the "operator_plus_plus" directly method you
> mean?  It'd be neater if they couldn't, but I hardly see that as a huge
> problem.
> 

Yeah, it is becomes an implementation detail method which a user does 
not need to know about.

William