[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [platform-swt-dev] GTK2 Tree: build, patch, and one smoking shot
|
Varargs could be supported by having Java equivalents accept as their
last argument an array. Then have a (single) static conversion function
in SWT that can convert a Java array into a va_list for passing into the
function (GTK should provide a va_list version of every function that
takes varargs for language binding reasons). Every vararg wrapper could
call this function, and then happily call the va_list version of the call.
-seth
Quoting Steve Northover <Steve_Northover@xxxxxxx>:
>
> What we did on Motif was type in the varargs combinations that we
> actually
> used.
> I think we also forced the programmer to supply the -1. SSQ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Boris Shingarov"
>
>
> <Boris_Shingarov@xxxxxx To:
> platform-swt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> M> cc:
>
>
> Sent by: Subject: Re:
> [platform-swt-dev] GTK2 Tree: build, patch, and one smoking shot
>
> platform-swt-dev-admin@
>
>
> eclipse.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 09/18/02 04:59 PM
>
>
> Please respond to
>
>
> platform-swt-dev
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree here. Silenio and I did discuss the problem with varargs a
> while
> ago, and decided to just follow the ostrich algorithm (stick your
> head in
> the sand and pretend there are no varargs) for now. It does not
> cause real
> problems for SWT implementation; having a one-arg version is enough
> for
> anything I needed so far. I agree this is world-class-ugly though.
>
>
>
>
> snickell@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Sent by: To:
>
> platform-swt-dev-admin@e platform-swt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> clipse.org cc:
>
> Subject: Re:
>
> [platform-swt-dev] GTK2 Tree: build,
> patch,
> 09/18/2002 04:22 PM and one smoking shot
>
> Please respond to
>
> platform-swt-dev
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Boris wrote:
> "Agreed in general (a lot of C code there that's WEIRD), but not in
> the
> particular case of varargs. How is
>
> set_value(int, boolean)
> set_value(int, int)
> set_value(int, String)
>
> with the appropriate C code (full signatures), weirder than
>
> set_value_boolean(int, boolean)
> set_value_int(int, int)
> set_value_string(int, String)?"
>
> That's not really addressing the vararg issue, only the issue of
> wrapping GValues (which isn't too bad, I'll admit).
>
> The vararg problem is that the GTK function accepts a list of values
> of
> undefined length (terminating in -1), or the same wrappered in the
> va_list type (which is what a received digs out of a vararg call,
> but
> isn't totally trivial to build). How do you want me to wrap this?
> Given
> the constraints of the SWT APIs, only one value at a time can be
> changed
> anyway, so IMO this is a bunch of functionally useless code since
> only
> only column's value will be changed at once anyway in SWT (and hence
> wrappering this by only accepting one value makes everything
> simpler).
>
> The alternative is accepting an array to the function, unpacking the
> array, and generating a va_list. This is going to be a hell of a lot
> more complicated, error prone, and difficult to debug than accepting
> a
> single argumument.
>
> -Seth
>
> _______________________________________________
> platform-swt-dev mailing list
> platform-swt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-swt-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> platform-swt-dev mailing list
> platform-swt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-swt-dev
>
