> -- off topic -- BTW I just got your book (GTK+/Gnome
> Application Development) Not too bad. It definitly
> a step in the right direction. Thanks, we need more
> of this stuff -- keep up the good work.
Sorry for making an off-topic reply ;-) but I felt I HAD to c
Hi All! :-)
>I think you're confused by the C++ name mangling.
No, they are two completely separate issues. Name mangling has nothing
to do with calling convention (except of course that functions declared
as "C" are not mangled). The C++ standard is very specific in
stating that the linkages
>So you can always use the data argument as a pointer to your object.
That works if you like :-)
>The simplest strategy to use to wrap GTK widgets in C++ classes is to
>use static members as callback functions, each having the "data"
>member a pointer to the C++ object. The callback function
>> Actually, it's very common for integal return values to be left in a
>> register, not in memory. So returning a value would not cause memory
>> corruption. For example, on x86, gcc leaves the return value in the
>> EAX register.
>>
>
>Fair enough.
>
>Still, it seems like a Bad Idea (tm) to re
Hi Havoc, Hi All! :-)
>The return value has to be stored in memory somewhere; if the
>compiler thinks there is no return value when invoking the
>function pointer it doesn't have to make that memory. But if the
>function being invoked has a return value it will put the return
>value there an
Hi All!
>- no return value - returning a value when "void" is
>expected usually causes memory corruption
Really? Thanks for the heads up!!! Upon what machine type
do you usually program? I mostly use intel, and although it
is a terrible coding practice, just for warning purposes on
WHICH
