#134 [c#] std_list.i for c#

open
None
5
2006-09-25
2005-12-08
No

I converted this from std_vector.i

Discussion

  • Eric Sanford

    Eric Sanford - 2005-12-08
     
  • William Fulton

    William Fulton - 2005-12-17

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=242951

    This is great. I don't suppose you have any regression tests
    for it, like Examples/test-suite/csharp/li_std_vector_runme.cs?

     
  • William Fulton

    William Fulton - 2005-12-17
    • assigned_to: nobody --> wsfulton
     
  • Eric Sanford

    Eric Sanford - 2005-12-18

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=828116

    i made this littal test.

     
  • Eric Sanford

    Eric Sanford - 2005-12-18

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=828116

    one other thing. I asked about this in the mail list but
    didn't get a responce. I purposely did not use "const T&"
    in std_list.i because like in std_vector.i i get errors
    compiling with that. maybe its my typemaping, if its not
    good to use that way please let me know. because in the
    project I'm working on I will have to copy and change the
    std_vector.i to use with non const pointer to classes, like say:
    typedef std::vector<cVal*> cValVector;

    my swig-user post:
    http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=14094441

     
  • Eric Sanford

    Eric Sanford - 2005-12-20

    try2 test for std_list.i

     
  • William Fulton

    William Fulton - 2005-12-27

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=242951

    The std_vector.i file has been fixed for vectors of const
    and non-const pointers. The value_type is used in the
    declaration as this is what is in the STL.

    I reckon you can take the std_vector_runme.cs file and make
    a few mods to thoroughly test the list wrappers. This is my
    preferred runtime test which I'll do if you don't beat me to it.

     
  • Olly Betts

    Olly Betts - 2006-09-25
    • summary: std_list.i for c# --> [c#] std_list.i for c#
     

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:





No, thanks