On 16.09.2012 20:42, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Sep 16, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
So, i'd like to hear your input, which one you like, and which ones
you prefer to have
1. requires creating a subclass of NBFFICallback, overriding it's
fnSpec method. Takes a block closure as a callback.
2. first you must create a factory object by specifying a callback
signature, then you can instantiate new callbacks by passing a block
closure to that factory
3. to create a callback you must specify it's signature in one of the
compiled methods, and specify an object which will receive a message
when callback will be called.
for what it is worth I like the 3rd form. Now I'm not sure on: is the right
selector.
+1, out of those listed #3 seems the most convenient to use.
Being able to do something like:
Integer >> #+
<types: #( int (int aNumber) )>
Then specify the callback parameter as
self callback: 3 with: #+
would be really neat.
As an added bonus, it also highlights the problems this approach would
have with simply annotating normal methods which utilize multiple
return/parameter types :)
Cheers,
Henry
