You can use "extern "Rust" fn" (or ||:'static) to achieve something like C++03
member function pointers without the lifetimes. Attacking Rust without asking
first how to do this is unappreciated.
In the future, unboxed closures will make callbacks easier.
I am opposed to function overloading and default parameters. I do not see it as
a burden to define meaningful unique function names. On the contrary, this
helps greppability in large codebases.
Patrick
On May 22, 2014 1:27:42 PM PDT, Alexander Tsvyashchenko <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>Hi All,
>
>Recently I was playing with bindings generator from C++ to Rust. I
>managed to make things work for Qt5 wrapping, but stumbled into
>multiple
>issues along the way.
>
>I tried to summarize my "pain points" in the following blog post:
>http://endl.ch/content/cxx2rust-pains-wrapping-c-rust-example-qt5
>
>I hope that others might benefit from my experience and that some of
>these "pain points" can be fixed in Rust.
>
>I'll try to do my best in answering questions / acting on feedback, if
>any, but I have very limited amount of free time right now so sorry in
>advance if answers take some time.
>
>Thanks!
>
>--
>Good luck! Alexander
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Rust-dev mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
