I also forgot to mention that there will also be a semantic change to the function body that is generated for
typedef void* (* AXIS_OBJECT_DELETE_FUNCT)(void**, bool bArray, int nSize) Basically, the function should be able to delete an array of objects, but should not delete the array itself since the creation of the array is done elsewhere. In the case of the C++ generated code the array objects do not even call this function to delete arrays, instead goes through a loop one at a time to delete - probably could simplify to call function to delete elements in array, but will leave for later). Similarily, the C bindings create the array itself and expects to delete the array. I will go through this and run the test bucket to ensure both changes do not break anything. Nadir K. Amra Adrian Dick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 04/19/2006 03:25:22 AM: > Hi, Nadir, > > I've just taken a look at the various places the engine uses this, and > agree these parameters are now redundant. Also, as you point out, removing > these will greatly simplify the generated code, and in turn the WSDL2Ws > code. > > +1 from me. > > Regards, > Adrian > _______________________________________ > Adrian Dick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > > Nadir Amra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 19/04/2006 05:33:40: > > > As I have been implementing the C bindings (getting close, AxisBench, > > CalculatorDoc, and SimpleTypeArray works like a charm), I think we should > > > be able to change the typedef for > > > > typedef void* (* AXIS_OBJECT_CREATE_FUNCT)(void**, bool bArray, int > > nSize); > > > > and the corresponding code. > > > > With the new array inplementation and knowing that the C bindings do not > > need it I believe the prototype can change so that it is: > > > > typedef void* (* AXIS_OBJECT_CREATE_FUNCT)(); > > > > It would simplify code (not only in generated code but in the java > > generator). > > > > Any objections? > > > > Nadir K. Amra > > >
