On 2010-04-05 08:09, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
>> or is it working ?
>> i'm confused.
>
> Had compiled with wrong headers. Ended up doing this :
>
> struct GemState92 {
> int dirty, inDisplayList, lighting, smooth, texture; pixBlock *image;
> GemState92(); ~GemState92(); void reset();
> };
> struct GemState93 {
> bool dirty, inDisplayList, lighting, smooth; int texture; pixBlock
> *image;
> GemState93(); ~GemState93(); void reset(); virtual void your_mom() = 0;
> };
> ...
> void render(void *state) {
> if (gem>=93) ((GemState93 *)state)->image = &m_pixBlock;
> else ((GemState92 *)state)->image = &m_pixBlock;
> }
> etc
>
> therefore I can support both with a single build.
> the idea is to drop all those public members and make them available via a get/set system, so new member variables can be introduced without breaking binary compatibility (and without having an ever-growing header file) it's not there yet. hopefully it will be there for 0.93 gmadr IOhannes
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
