Quick follow up:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Bill Moseley <mose...@hank.org> wrote:
>
> family( int count, char* names[], int ages[], char* family_name );
>
>
> [1] I guess I'd better see if family() holds on to the addresses of
> names[] and ages[] after returning. Hum, if I don't know that maybe I
> need to malloc my own "object" so I can free those on DESTROY. Is that
> right?
Thinking about this a bit more I realized that this specific constructor is
only called ONCE per process. So, if I malloc names[] and ages[] I'm not
sure it's a problem if they don't get freed. Does that simplify things?
i.e. don't need to malloc a struct to hold these until DESTROY.
Second, this is my first use of XS and C++, and in the simple tests I've
been doing XS is setting up a "THIS" for me. If I need to malloc a struct
that holds names[], ages[], and the address returned by the C++ constructo
("my_cpp_object"), if my new method returns this struct then is that what
THIS ends up as? That is, instead of THIS->method() I would then do
THIS->my_cpp_object->method().
Am I making this harder that it is?
--
Bill Moseley
mose...@hank.org
