Re: abstract unified interface
David Abrahams <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.boost.langbinding |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Daniel Wallin <[email protected]> writes: > David Abrahams wrote: >> Daniel Wallin <[email protected]> writes: >> >>>>>With compile time generated converters that are >>>>>language dependent these kind of things are more convenient. >>>>> >>>>>This would maybe include things like transforming: >>>>> >>>>> f(T*) [ adopt(_1) ] >>>>> >>>>>to >>>>> >>>>> f(adopted_pointer<T>) >>>>> >>>>> I don't know.. >>>> >>>>Really? I wouldn't have thought so. I'd just build an AST of the >>>>policies on the registration side and walk it with a visitor inside >>>>the language-specific component. Am I missing something? >>> >>>I don't know. You would visit the policies at init time and setup some >>>function pointers or whatever to do the actual policy calls at runtime? >> Something like that. >> >>>Can you elaborate? >> It would be up to each language backend how it wants to translate >> policies into something it can interpret. > > Yeah it's kind of nice, but I'm concerned about the amount of additional > virtual calls we'd end up with. I can't tell if this matters that much, > but at least I think it should be considered. Done ;-) Seriously, remember that your interpreter's overhead swamps small C++ function calls. We can afford to take quite a few liberties. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? Does it help you create better code? SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help YOU! Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/