>> I have a proposal.
>> Let's say I have function print_utf8() which accepts const char *
>> parameter in utf8 encoding, and I want to do Harbour wrapper
>> function for this C function.
>> 1) current code
>> HB_FUNC( PRINT )
>> {
>> const char * str;
>> void * h;
>> h = hb_parstr_utf8( 1, &str, NULL );
>> hb_retnl( printf_utf8( str ) );
>> hb_strfree( h );
>> }
>> 2) if we change hb_parstr_ut8() to return string, and handler to be
>> returned via parameter reference.
>> HB_FUNC( PRINT )
>> {
>> void * h;
>> hb_retnl( printf_utf8( hb_parstr_utf8( 1, &h, NULL ) ) );
>> hb_strfree( h );
>> }
>> The same proposal for hb_itemGetStr*().
>
> These are new functions and we should choose optimal interface for them
> so if such form is more flexible for users then why not. We should only
> keep similar syntax in all corresponding functions to not confuse users.
> Other opinions?
I like this new calling convention. Allows for
more compact/smooth caller code.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
