Re: [Swig-devel] mangling for a binding where _ is a problem.

[John L. <jl...@ma...>]

On 06/06/2007 02:10 PM, Ben Allan wrote:
> Here's a patch which introduces alternative mangler ability
> without requiring changes to existing bindings.
> As mentioned in another posting, it could also work without exposing
> extern String *SwigType_manglestr_default(SwigType *s);
> extern String *SwigType_manglestr_nounderscore(SwigType *s);
> but I would prefer to expose all the manglings available if possible.

Yeah, I think it is fine to expose the manglers

> In the 'hidden' case, the SwigType_manglestr_nounderscore
> would not be put in stype.c but instead off somewhere in my binding.

No, they should be shared if possible.

> +static Swig_manglertype Swig_mangler = SwigType_manglestr_default;
> +
> +/* -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> + * SwigType_set_mangler()
> + *
> + * Replaces the current mangler function with a new one, returning the
> + * old one to the caller. 
> + * Design note: Calling with NULL changes nothing but gives access to the
> + * current mangler. The other alternative (if NULL, reset to default) does
> + * not allow the caller to as easily handle obscure cases where a binding
> + * may want to push/popd handlers on the stack midstream.
> + * A separate get_mangler could be provided if desired on aesthetic grounds.
> + * ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- */

I would rather see a separate get_mangler.  Makes the code (in the
module) clearer what is happening.  And we don't really have a mandate
to keep the exported functions small... the swig core API can get as big
as it needs to.

> +Swig_manglertype SwigType_set_mangler(Swig_manglertype mangler) {
> +  Swig_manglertype old = Swig_mangler;
> +  if (mangler==NULL) return Swig_mangler;
> +  Swig_mangler = mangler;
> +  return old;
> +}

Other than that, this code looks fine.

John