Hello Viktor

Viktor Szakáts wrote:
> 
> This is a very important issue and it should be fixed
> if we want to rely on HBQT for serious work. I also suggest
> to create RTE when wrong parameter is passed instead of
> GC collected pointer of valid kind. It's not really a topic
> which should or could be debated. If a library allows to
> create GPF just by passing wrong parameter to it, it's wrong
> and we never can be sure if a reported GPF is some "real"
> error, or "just" a wrongly passed parameter. Not to mention
> that wrongly passed parameters can easily signal errors in
> other parts of the lib, which makes detection even more
> complicated.
> 
> Using hb_parptr() when wrong parameter is detected just
> makes handling of the problem even more fishy.
> 
> An RTE is straightforward though.
> 

It is not a matter of posting RTE but a matter how a pointer 
is obtained in HBQT. We can use this mechanism if in .prg code 
every pointer is recieved with "new" method. In other words 
if we are using .prg classes only to obtain it. Mostly we receive 
pointer direct from .cpp. I will explin this later but first let me 
overcome with memory issue. May be we will bave better control
of such situations.

Regards
Pritpal Bedi


-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/HBQT---A-Clarification-tp25951642p25982335.html
Sent from the Harbour - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Reply via email to