On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Brad King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brad King wrote: >> Roman Yakovenko wrote: >>> if you ask me, I would revert last commit. The >>> previous situation was deterministic: only declarations, defined by >>> the users, were dumped. Now, I cannot even reliably apply my >>> "guesses". >> >> In that case how do you propose to fix this bug: >> >> http://www.gccxml.org/Bug/view.php?id=7148 >> >> ? This is a case where your old guesses would be wrong, I think.
Yes. In this case pygccxml will not be able to guess. It is trade-off. > Can you work with the current version if you ignore declarations marked > "artificial"? Remember that before the GCC 4.2 upgrade the artificial > copy constructor *did* show up. Good idea! I didn't think about it. I can do this. I can take "artificial" declarations into account if they exist and apply the current logic if they don't. Thank you! -- Roman Yakovenko C++ Python language binding http://www.language-binding.net/ _______________________________________________ gccxml mailing list [email protected] http://www.gccxml.org/mailman/listinfo/gccxml
