[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: declarations for built-in DEFUN functions
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: declarations for built-in DEFUN functions |
Date: |
Wed, 19 Sep 2012 09:34:49 -0400 |
On 19-Sep-2012, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
| On 09/18/2012 03:23 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
|
| > What about for the functions in the libinterp/corefcn directory?
| > Those don't currently have corresponding header files. Should they,
|
| I'd say no. Reason being that the contents of these files really isn't
| OOP code using the C++ constructs. It is the class definitions of C++
| that typically have a header-file/code-file combo. I think they could
| be called .c rather than .cc for valid reasons.
I don't think it makes sense to name those files .c since the
signature of a DEFUN function requires the C++ class
octave_value_list.
| Similarly, the lex.cc
| code could be compiled under C which would eliminate some cast warnings.
Similarly, the actions in the lexer depend heavily on C++ classes, so
I don't see how the generated lex.cc file can be compiled by a C
compiler.
jwe