Re: [pygccxml-development] Function adaptors‏‏

[Roman Y. <rom...@gm...>]

2009/8/20 Berserker <ber...@ho...>:
> I made some other tests :)
> If I simply declare (assuming that we always have a wrapper class):

In case of exported non-public virtual member function the wrapper always exists

>> ::boost::python::class_< Foo_wrapper, ::boost::noncopyable >( "Foo",
>> ::boost::python::init< >() )
>>         .def(
>>             "public_virtual"
>>             , (void ( Foo_wrapper::* )(  ))
>> (&Foo_wrapper::default_public_virtual) )
>>         .def(
>>             "protected_virtual"
>>             , (void ( Foo_wrapper::* )(
>> )(&Foo_wrapper::default_protected_virtual) )    );
>
> virtual public/protected functions (with "base" call from Python) works as
> expected
> with no "hacks" (tested from Python<->C++).

I will try to integrate this soon ( +- 2days ).

> Why Py++ declares virtual public/protected functions as:
>
>> .def("public_virtual", (void ( ::Foo::* )(  ) )(&::Foo::public_virtual),
>> (void ( Foo_wrapper::* )(  )(&Foo_wrapper::default_public_virtual) )
>
> insted of simply:
>> .def("public_virtual", (void ( Foo_wrapper::* )(
>> )(&Foo_wrapper::default_public_virtual) )
>
> when we have a wrapper class?
>
> I hope that this change seems reasonable to you.

It is. I have many tests in this area so will find out whether it
works or have some other problems.

> P.S.: Thanks for your patience :D :D :D

:-), just keep testing what you propose and will be fine


-- 
Roman Yakovenko
C++ Python language binding
http://www.language-binding.net/