|
From: Matthias B. <ba...@ir...> - 2006-09-24 07:13:36
|
Roman Yakovenko wrote:
> On 9/23/06, Matthias Baas <ba...@ir...> wrote:
>> Roman Yakovenko wrote:
>> > They should. Can you give me few good reasons to not create wrappers?
>>
>> I've just stumbled over another problem as I compiled the bindings on
>> Linux. Compilation fails because of a class that has a private
>> destructor. This class only provides static members and a few enums, it
>> isn't meant to be instantiated (let alone sub-classed).
>
> Sometimes static members need wrapper, for example arrays.
> Can you post small code that reproduce the problem?
class Foo
{
public:
static void get_value(int& n) { n = 12; }
private:
~Foo() {}
};
In your generation script you have to assign the output transformer to
get_value:
Foo.member_function("get_value").function_transformers.append(output_t(1))
Compilation will then produce the following error:
testlib.h: In constructor `Foo_wrapper::Foo_wrapper()':
testlib.h:14: error: `Foo::~Foo()' is private
testlib/Foo.pypp.cpp:13: error: within this context
error: command 'gcc' failed with exit status 1
Tested on Linux with gcc 3.3.4 (whereas MSVC 7.1 obviously ignores that
the destructor is private and compiles the above code without problems,
so you have to test with gcc as well).
- Matthias -
|
