On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 10:03 PM キャロウ マーク <git...@callow.im> wrote:
>
>
> On May 22, 2024, at 23:47, 'Sam Clegg' via emscripten-discuss <
> emscripten-discuss@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 11:30 PM キャロウ マーク <git...@callow.im> wrote:
>
>> When on the verge of releasing a major chunk of work, having a new
>> version of the compiler throw up 4 errors is extremely, extremely
>> disappointing. The disappointment is compounded by being unable to find any
>> documentation describing the effect of the compiler changes and how to
>> adapt one’s code. I have not found the documentation remotely helpful in
>> understanding what is wrong. Must do better!
>>
>
> Please try to be respectful and understanding here in this forum.
>
>
> What part of the paragraph do you feel was disrespectful?
>
>
I found the tone of your comment to be very harsh. The folks who work on
emscripten are doing their best to build something that works for our users
and gets better over time. Calling things "extremely, extremely
disappointing" and demanding "Must do better!" could come across to some as
entitled. Just toning it down a little would likely be better received
and yield better outcomes, which we all want of course.
> If there are issues with the 3.1.60 we will do our best to resolve them.
> In the meantime, your project should be able to continue to use 3.1.59.
>
>
> Changing CI to stick with 3.1.59 is a similar amount of work to fixing the
> issue except that for changing CI there are probably fewer unknown unknowns.
>
> I have fixed my binding by changing it to use real constructors, which
> return nothing, as constructors instead of functions with return values.
> That is instead of
>
>
>> class_<ktx::texture>("ktxTexture")
>> .constructor(&ktx::texture::createFromMemory,
>> return_value_policy::take_ownership())
>> .constructor(&ktx::texture::create,
>> return_value_policy::take_ownership())
>> .constructor(&ktx::texture::createFromBuffer,
>> return_value_policy::take_ownership())
>> ;
>>
>
> I have
>
> .constructor<const val>()
> .constructor<const ktxTextureCreateInfo&,
> ktxTextureCreateStorageEnum>()
> .constructor<const val&, int, int, int, bool>()
>
> matching constructors in the C++ code.
>
> I created the binding too many years ago to recall why I used functions
> for constructors. They look weird now. However embind still supports doing
> so. It looks like an oversight to me that 3.1.60 does not support use of
> return_value_policy in such constructors and a bug that is silently ignores
> such when present.
>
> Regards
>
> -Mark
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "emscripten-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/178F98B9-73FE-471F-80A9-DD1A4EF577EE%40callow.im
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/178F98B9-73FE-471F-80A9-DD1A4EF577EE%40callow.im?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to emscripten-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CAL_va2_GRFJGdi10kTtcfX8SW1vK32ap6zHk%3DJDPZKHEzXAVkg%40mail.gmail.com.
