On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:
Hi,
> >> 2) if we change hb_parstr_ut8() to return string, and handler to be
> >> returned via parameter reference.
> >> HB_FUNC( PRINT )
> >> {
> >> void * h;
> >> hb_retnl( printf_utf8( hb_parstr_utf8( 1, &h, NULL ) ) );
> >> hb_strfree( h );
> >> }
> >> The same proposal for hb_itemGetStr*().
> > These are new functions and we should choose optimal interface for them
> > so if such form is more flexible for users then why not. We should only
> > keep similar syntax in all corresponding functions to not confuse users.
> > Other opinions?
> I like this new calling convention. Allows for
> more compact/smooth caller code.
Fine, I'll commit modifications in a while.
Please only remember that it can be used in such context only when ulLen
parameter is NULL and code like:
hb_retnl( printf_utf8( hb_parstr_utf8( 1, &h, &ulLen ), ulLen ) );
is wrong because depending on calling convention ulLen can be passed
as parameter of printf_utf8() function before it's set by hb_parstr_utf8().
best regards,
Przemek
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
[email protected]
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
