digitalmars.D - static member functions
- John Fletcher (39/39) Jun 15 2004 I am working with some automatically generated D interface code where
- Ben Hinkle (4/56) Jun 15 2004 Declaring getPtr as static and public should work. I recommend getting a...
- john bunbury28.pluc.com (25/28) Jun 16 2004 Thanks for the hint. It isn't a bug, but a misunderstanding of mine. Th...
- John Fletcher (4/17) Jun 18 2004 The alternative is to rename the file e.g. classA.d instead of A.d
- Norbert Nemec (3/16) Jun 18 2004 It might just be a typo in the post, but still: accessing "Ptr" within a
I am working with some automatically generated D interface code where
code for each C++ class being wrapped is put into a different file. The
problem is that the classes interact, and that I have a problem with
permission to see a specific static member function between classes. It
all works if the code is all in one file.
Example:
public class A {
private void* Ptr;
private static void* getPtr(A obj) {
return (obj === null) ? null : Ptr; }
}
is an extract from automatically generated code.
If a second class B has a constructor with an A as an argument the code
generated is
public class B {
// ...
public this(A a) {
// contains A.getPtr(a) which fails unless the code for B is in
the same file as the code for A.
// This applies even if I change the permission of the static
function to public.
}
}
One workaround is to put into the defintion of A the extra member
function
public void* Ptr() { return getPtr(this); }
which can be seen from the other file, i.e. putting a.Ptr() for
A.getPtr().
I am in a position to edit the code which does the automatic generation,
and the aim is to find a general solution which would result in the
generation of valid code which works. There should be no need to edit
the result.
At the moment the question is, is there a way in which the code of class
A could be altered so that class B can see A.setPtr(obj) even when they
are in separate files?
More details of the background to this are on
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DwithSwig
Thanks
John Fletcher
Jun 15 2004
Declaring getPtr as static and public should work. I recommend getting an
example of the problem with as few lines as possible and post it on
digitalmars.D.bugs.
John Fletcher wrote:
I am working with some automatically generated D interface code where
code for each C++ class being wrapped is put into a different file. The
problem is that the classes interact, and that I have a problem with
permission to see a specific static member function between classes. It
all works if the code is all in one file.
Example:
public class A {
private void* Ptr;
private static void* getPtr(A obj) {
return (obj === null) ? null : Ptr; }
}
is an extract from automatically generated code.
If a second class B has a constructor with an A as an argument the code
generated is
public class B {
// ...
public this(A a) {
// contains A.getPtr(a) which fails unless the code for B is in
the same file as the code for A.
// This applies even if I change the permission of the static
function to public.
}
}
One workaround is to put into the defintion of A the extra member
function
public void* Ptr() { return getPtr(this); }
which can be seen from the other file, i.e. putting a.Ptr() for
A.getPtr().
I am in a position to edit the code which does the automatic generation,
and the aim is to find a general solution which would result in the
generation of valid code which works. There should be no need to edit
the result.
At the moment the question is, is there a way in which the code of class
A could be altered so that class B can see A.setPtr(obj) even when they
are in separate files?
More details of the background to this are on
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DwithSwig
Thanks
John Fletcher
Jun 15 2004
In article <camq9o$1sb1$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Ben Hinkle says...Declaring getPtr as static and public should work. I recommend getting an example of the problem with as few lines as possible and post it on digitalmars.D.bugs.Thanks for the hint. It isn't a bug, but a misunderstanding of mine. The problem is that the automatically generated file has the same name as the class within it. When class A has a public static member e.g. class A { public static void* getPtr(A obj) { // something } } The structure in a class B importing a class A is that A is the module and the class is referred to as A.A import A; class B { public void* getAPtr(A obj) { return A.A.getPtr(a); // This works. } //public void* getAPtr(A obj) { // return A.getPtr(a); This fails. //} } I now need to alter the SWIG code generator for D to do the correct thing. Thanks again. John
Jun 16 2004
john bunbury28.plus.com wrote:In article <camq9o$1sb1$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Ben Hinkle says...The alternative is to rename the file e.g. classA.d instead of A.d This is what I have done. JohnDeclaring getPtr as static and public should work. I recommend getting an example of the problem with as few lines as possible and post it on digitalmars.D.bugs.Thanks for the hint. It isn't a bug, but a misunderstanding of mine. The problem is that the automatically generated file has the same name as the class within it. I now need to alter the SWIG code generator for D to do the correct thing. Thanks again. John
Jun 18 2004
John Fletcher wrote:
I am working with some automatically generated D interface code where
code for each C++ class being wrapped is put into a different file. The
problem is that the classes interact, and that I have a problem with
permission to see a specific static member function between classes. It
all works if the code is all in one file.
Example:
public class A {
private void* Ptr;
private static void* getPtr(A obj) {
return (obj === null) ? null : Ptr; }
}
It might just be a typo in the post, but still: accessing "Ptr" within a
static function will not work. Instead, it should be "obj.Ptr".
Jun 18 2004









John Fletcher <J.P.Fletcher aston.ac.uk> 