Am Freitag, 25. Mai 2007 schrieb Giel van Schijndel: > Giel van Schijndel schreef: > > Christian Ohm schreef: > >> On Wednesday, 23 May 2007 at 22:46, Giel van Schijndel wrote: > >>> Christian Ohm schreef: > >>>> Some g++ fixes again. "new" is a reserved keyword, a few casts, and > >>>> I've moved OggVorbisDecoderState into oggvorbis.h, there was a linker > >>>> error when it was typedeffed to void in some cases. Don't know why it > >>>> was done that way, still works for me now. I've removed an #ifdef > >>>> WZ_NOOGG, but ./configure --disable-ogg was broken before anyway. > >>> > >>> That double typedef was done to encapsulate the OggVorbis decoding > >>> code, compare it to a C++ pimpl if you wish. The linker error is caused > >>> by C++'s function overloading, so the correct fix is not to expose > >>> details, but disabling function overloading for that function: extern > >>> "C". > >> > >> Hm, in C this looks quite inelegant to me; just because the struct is > >> exposed to the outside doesn't mean you have to access it directly. In > >> C++ the whole class is exposed as well, you just have the access control > >> via private (unless you just use pointers to the class; I've thought > >> about that as well but was too lazy to try to rewrite the code that > >> way). > > > > I have to agree that it is quite inelegant. Although my approach isn't > > similar to C++'s private keyword, it's more equal to the Pimpl idiom. ( > > http://www.gamedev.net/reference/articles/article1794.asp ) > > > > However the void* pointer indeed isn't nice. Therefore I've now taken a > > new approach to this: forward declaration of the struct (which is enough > > to create a pointer to it). It does, however, require the addition of > > the keyword 'struct' in front of every declaration of > > OggVorbisDecoderState or pointers to it. > > > > Patch is attached for review. I haven't looked into a typedef solution > > to eliminate the struct keyword yet, so if you happen to know one right > > away, please tell me. > > Sorry forgot to mention, with "review", I meant whether no-one objects > this approach. Especially the resulting consequence of needing to > specify "struct" for each declaration additionally. Afaik you don't need to mention the struct in the C file. Using the typedef should be ok.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
