On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Michael Ash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please excuse a foolish question, but.... Why wrap this in Objective-C > at all? Looks like the resulting ObjC code is essentially the same, > except uglier, slower, and harder to use. Why not just keep the C and > use it directly?
This isn't a foolish question. The function declaration that I've shown you is something of a fiction; it's a definition in an input file to a code generator (gSOAP). It doesn't actually exist in the resulting C code. This definition: >> int ns__add(double a, double b, double *result); will actually become: int soap_call_ns__add(struct soap *soap, const char *endpoint, const char *action, double a, double b, double result*); gSOAP knows how to generate C and C++ and with C++ will generate a proxy for this C function and the SOAP object, so that it looks more like: class calcProxy { public: int add(double a, double b, double *result) { return soap_call_ns__add(soap, endpoint, "", a, b, result); } struct soap *soap; char *endpoint; } What I want to do is to create an ObjC proxy similar to the C++ proxy. Yes, I know I could use ObjC++, but there are reasons I want to use ObjC instead of ObjC++ including not having to deal with two different object models in my ObjC programs. Generating the proxy isn't going to be that hard; I'm just trying to figure out what the best naming conventions for these generated methods and classes will be. -austin -- Austin Ziegler * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.halostatue.ca/ * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/ * [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]