On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Hyrum K. Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > For the C++ folks out there, I've got a question about an approach to > take on the object-model branch. At issue is how to wrap the various > C structures returned to callers, particularly in a backward > compatible manner. Currently, I'm looking at svn_wc_notify_t *. As I > see it, there are a few options: > > 1) Just wrap the pointer to the C struct as a member of the wrapper class. > Pros: Easy to implement; lightweight constructor. > Cons: Getters would need to translate to C++ types; would need to > implement a copy constructor which deep copies the C struct; would > also introduce pools, since creating and duplicating C structs > requires them. > > 2) Wrap each C struct member individually > Pros: C->C++ complexity is constrained to the constructor, > everything else is C++ types > Cons: Hard to extend for future compatibility > > 3) Just pass the C-struct pointer around; don't even bother with a class > Pros: Dead simple. > Cons: Requires more memory management thought by consumers; not > C++-y enough; may introduce wrapping difficulties. > > I'd like to come up with something consistent, which would be used > throughout the C++ bindings. I'm also interested in a solution which > ensures the C++ bindings can be used as the basis for other > object-oriented bindings models (Python, Perl, etc.)
After lunch, and some thought, it feels like #1 is the best solution. This doesn't change the external class interface, which is good, and can still provide C++ values to callers who want them. The pool issues are a bit messy, but at least the object can manage it's own memory (albeit at a significant overhead). -Hyrum
