On Tuesday 22 February 2005 00:27, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Has anyone had a chance to look at the Ns_ParseObjv() patch I posted?
>
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1122940&group_id=130646&atid=719009
>
> My main concern is that the general approach is about right. Does it
> make sense? One thing I notice is that there's no facility to check
> the presence of a switch that doesn't take an arg, a boolean switch.
It makes sense. I have checked this in and took the liberty to
reformat it a little to maintain the 80-char margin, fix tabs
to spaces and a touch in function comment headers here/there.
I hope you don't mind... I'm just an old nitpicker!
> That is a simple Ns_ObjvProc plugin.
Yup. This we should add as well.
Oh, yes... I changed Ns_ObjvString to optionally return
the length of the parsed string in *arg. This should not
break anything, as I see it, or?
int
Ns_ObjvString(void *dest, Tcl_Interp *interp, int objc, Tcl_Obj *CONST objv[],
void *arg)
{
if (objc > 0) {
if (arg == NULL) {
*((char **) dest) = Tcl_GetString(objv[0]);
} else {
*((char **) dest) = Tcl_GetStringFromObj(objv[0], (int*)arg);
}
return --objc;
}
return -1;
}
Cheers
Zoran
