Re: [ruby-fltk-devel] Mapping C++ objects to Ruby objects

[Takaaki T. <tt...@ja...>]

At Fri, 17 Aug 2001 08:46:02 -0700,
Kevin Smith <kev...@ho...> wrote:
> > class RBFl_Xxxx : Fl_Xxxx {
> > public:
> >   VALUE rb_object;
> >   ....
> > }
> 
> Exactly.

I've tried to implement the above class, but some problems are found.
if we implement classes RBFL_Xxxx and RBFL_Yyyy, RBFL_Yyyy is a subclass
of the class RBFL_Xxxx, we obtain the following class hierarchy.

Fl_Xxxxx -------> RBFL_Xxxxx
   |
   |
   V
Fl_Yyyyy -------> RBFL_Yyyyy

if ruby classes `Fltk::Xxxx' and `Fltk::Yyyy' wrap the C++ classes
`RBFL_Xxxx' and `RBFL_Yyyy' respectively, the C++ class hierarchy
is different from the Ruby class hierarchy.
I think we had better write the class like this:

class RBFl_Xxxx : Fl_Xxxx {
public:
  VALUE rb_object;
  ....
}

class RBFl_Yyyy : public Fl_Yyyy, public RBFl_Xxxx {
  ...
}

class RBFl_Zzzz : public Fl_Zzzz, public RBFl_Yyyy {
  ...
}

> > and making the structure for the Ruby class,
> > 
> > struct rb_fl_data {
> >   RBFl_Xxxxx *widget;
> > }
> 
> I'm not sure what we would store in *widget.

Sorry, I mistake here. please forget that code.

> One other note: I'm not really happy with RBFl_ as a prefix. I would much
> prefer one of the following, as they seem more consistent:
> 1. RBFL_Xxx
> 2. RubyFltkXxx

I use `RBFl_', since the Fltk uses `Fl_'.
I prefer short name. how about `RBFLXxx'?
-- 
Takaaki Tateishi <tt...@ja...>