Re: [pygccxml-development] Additional attribute functionality

[Ben S. <bsc...@lu...>]

=20



=09
=09

		However, I think I'll stick to mem_fun*s(...,
allow_empty=3Dtrue) for now. It makes more sense...
	=09

=09
	In this case it make more sense to set allow_empty to be always
true by
=09
	scopedef_t. ALLOW_EMPTY_MDECL_WRAPPER =3D True=20
	=20

This is what I am doing now. It seems to work ok with the
_select_multiple functions.

	 PS. I don't understand how we are avoiding a loop by writing

		=20
		for decl in class_.decls():
		=20
		wouldn't this be the same if decls() returned a list?
		And then the benefit of a list would be it's standard
operations...

=09
=09
	It is hard to come with good example for pygccxml only classes,
partly because declaration classes doesn't contain functionality, but
only data.=20
=09
	For Py++ it is very easy, for example update some property for
all selected declarations:
=09
	decls =3D class_.decls( some condition )
	decls.xxx =3D yyy
=09
	Or even=20
=09
	class_.decls( some condition ).xxx =3D yyy=20
=09
	it is much shorter than
=09
	[ d.xxx =3D yyy for d in class_.decls( some condition ) )
=09
	But may be you are right. I will think about this point.
	=20

If this functionality works, then it would be VERY good to add the above
comments to the code and/or documentation.
I didn't understand that you could do this before. However, I think that
having query operators that return lists of decls would be good because
it provides more functionality then mdecl_wrapper_t, you can concatenate
lists together and it leaves open the possibility of adding
functionality to decls.
This doesn't mean you need to remove the mdecl_wrapper_t functions, they
are pretty innovative...
=20
Cheers
Ben
=20

	=20
	--=20
	Roman Yakovenko
	C++ Python language binding
	http://www.language-binding.net/=20