On Nov 5, 2007 11:53 PM, Brad King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Roman Yakovenko wrote: > > I finally had time to investigate failures in pygccxml unittests. I will > > list all changes I saw. > > > > Code, generated XML for both versions and essential differences could be > > found in > > > http://pygccxml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pygccxml/pygccxml_dev/gccxml-0.9-upgrade/ > > Thanks! Do you mind if I link to this off the gccxml.org News page?
Not at all. I am going to accumulate such changes in that place. > > > > 1. Numerics is now reported with suffixes. For example instead 7, gccxml > > 0.9 will report 7u or 7ul. See file const_variables.* files > > 2. Demangled string has changed. For example see > > > http://pygccxml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pygccxml/pygccxml_dev/gccxml-0.9-upgrade/demangled.h.diff?revision=1118&view=markup > > < > http://pygccxml.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pygccxml/pygccxml_dev/gccxml-0.9-upgrade/demangled.h.diff?revision=1118&view=markup > > > > file > > 3. Type for pointers to member variable ( offset ) has changed. > > 4. If struct doesn't contains user defined constructors, than new xml > > will not contain them too. The previous version of GCC-XML generated > > default & copy constructors > > 5. Function default values contain "right values". > > > > I guess 1,2 & 4 are not bug and I need to update the code. I am not sure > > about 3. I didn't take a look on new source code. > > These are all due to changes in GCC itself. Point #3 is a bit annoying > but I do not see any reason that this was a wrong decision by the GCC > folks. There is no such thing as a member-data type or > reference-to-member type...there is only a pointer-to-member type. > Thanks for explanation. -- Roman Yakovenko C++ Python language binding http://www.language-binding.net/
_______________________________________________ gccxml mailing list [email protected] http://www.gccxml.org/mailman/listinfo/gccxml
