Also, ABI stability. M
On 08/07/2014 02:51 PM, Marcus Müller wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
