Tillman, James writes:
> What's your opinion on moving the inlined functions out? Would it create
> too much of a performance hit? I'll look into SWIG.
I would say yes. Although I did not realy mesure the impact. There are
a *lot* of inlined functions. Knowing that I guess nobody refrains from
using member functions on critical performance code after checking that
it's inlined.
Beside, I see no reason why inline functions should be a problem at
all. Could you describe exactly the kind of problem you have ?
> The primary problems I had using the header files in my XS project were to
> do with macros conflicting and the stream classes conflicting. Would you be
> able to provide any tips on preventing those conflicts? I'd love to just be
> able to say "#include Searcher.h" and be done with it!
Since I'm using SWIG, I can't really tell you how to deal with this when
using XS. The SWIG way of dealing with this is to #ifndef SWIG the problematic
parts. For instance, SWIG is not able to handle overloaded operators and
overloaded functions. However it provides a simple mechanisme to rename
functions (just for swig purpose). Of course you end up with a .h containing
various #ifndef SWIG statements but it's a minor inconvinience compared to
the advantage.
If you want to see how it works for me, check
http://www.senga.org/Search-Mifluz/distrib/Search-Mifluz-0.01.tar.gz
You won't be able to re-run SWIG because the htword/*.h are not yet
modified with the #ifndef SWIG but it will give you an idea of what
can be done with SWIG and htdig.
Cheers,
--
Loic Dachary
ECILA
100 av. du Gal Leclerc
93500 Pantin - France
Tel: 33 1 56 96 10 85
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://www.senga.org/
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
