On 01/12/2013 11:56 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
a t_class *s_class? Would that affect performance?
it would break binary compatibility.
there's no good reason to add hash-like lookups to t_symbol (your only
reason is convenience).
and avoiding code duplication.
i think that breaking binary compatibility is more important than code
duplication, but ...
Then searching for an existing class would be easy-- just do
a gensym and check if its s_class exists.
but checking whether a class exists, is as simple as calling zgetfn on
pd_objectmaker.
i think this is _quite_ easy.
Well yes. I meant searching for a class and _returning_ a class pointer.
...which only means that the current interface (using zgetfn with
pd_objectmaker) is inadequate to your problem.
So without adding/revising code inside class_new, is creating an instance
the only way to get access to the class attributes?
unfortunately yes.
but adding/revising code inside class_new would retain 100% binary
compatibility, whereas adding members to public structures is a 100%
guarantee to break binary compatibiliy.
i think it is one of Pd's greater weaknesses, that so many data
structures are exposed (rather than opaque).
if we had more accessor-functions, there would be less need to worry
about binary compatibiliy.
fgamsdr
IOhannes
_______________________________________________
Pd-dev mailing list
Pd-dev@iem.at
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
