[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       python-cpp-sig
Subject:    Re: [C++-sig] Member function bp::optional? Or workaround?
From:       Hans Meine <hans_meine () gmx ! net>
Date:       2010-01-12 20:09:39
Message-ID: 201001122109.40705.hans_meine () gmx ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Dienstag 12 Januar 2010, Charles Solar wrote:
> Well I want to define the overloads myself anyway, I just do not know how
> to properly setup the small wrapper that will work.

Oh, OK.

> In the doc it tells 
> you how to make flat function wrappers, but nothing on member function
> wrappers.

I am 100% sure that they're documented, yet I am not very lucky with the docs 
either.

> I am unsure how I am supposed to handle the this pointer, for 
> example.

You can reference the member function pointer like this (untested of course):

.def("bar", (void(Foo::*)(const Y*))&T::bar)
.def("bar", (void(Foo::*)(const X&,const Y*))&T::bar)

> So idealy what I would like to know is what the macro does so I can
> manually write out the wrappers myself.
>
> And I have tried using Py++, it does not handle the default argument, it
> just puts the call in there and python still requires the param to be
> there.

Really?  AFAIK, it should work.

You should be able to write (arg("some_x"), arg("some_y") = NULL)) as 
extra .def() argument.

Maybe py++ does not output the default args when the arguments are unnamed?
(I wouldn't know how, either.)

-- 
Ciao, /  /                                                    .o.
     /--/                                                     ..o
    /  / ANS                                                  ooo

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Cplusplus-sig mailing list
Cplusplus-sig@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cplusplus-sig

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]