Yes :) On 07.08.2014 14:40, Tiankun Hu wrote: > Thanks Marcus, > My understand is we can define the member function that Pyton want to > know in block_name.h > and other thing that Python not interesting in block_name_impl.h, and > then swig.i only include block_name.h, so this will simplify SWIG's > config, right? > > 在 2014年08月07日 20:18, Marcus Müller 写道: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Hi Tiankun, >> >> the advantage lies in the fact that the user of your block just has to >> look at the block_name.h (and also SWIG), and you can exchange, >> implement, extend and subclass your implementation to your heart's >> delight in the block_name_impl.h. This simplifies SWIG wrapping a lot, >> and thus has, at least for me, decreased development complexity >> significantly. >> >> Greetings, >> Marcus >> >> On 07.08.2014 14:15, Tiankun Hu wrote: >>> Hi All, I want know to why the block has been split into two class: >>> "block_name.cc" and "block_name_impl.cc", why do we need a virtual >>> class, and use a "_impl" to inherit it? As we know, the older >>> gnuradio just use a single class. Is there any advantage of this >>> change? >
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
