You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
So a method new( ... ) would take values and return a blessed pointer
A private value fuel would take up space in the pointer but not exposed somehow
Methods would automatically be made with THIS calling conventions and can be renamed ([ speed => 'set_speed' ] => ...) to avoid collisions
Should multiple methods with the same name be wrapped in a code ref that called the correct one based on the type of values passed? I'd need a way to test parameter types beyond advisory...
Edit: In the above examples, MyClass::speed() would be _ZN7MyClass5speedEv and MyClass::set_speed($) would be _ZN7MyClass5speedEi in Itanium.
defined with CPPStruct[ ... ] (borrowing from Raku)
constructors are simply wrapped with affix/wrap with names such as MyClass::MyClass or MyClass::new which attach to the the proper endpoint through mangling and proper handling of this pointer internally
destructors are MyClass::DESTROY and handled internally
no direct access to struct members (public or private)
I haven't wrapped a full C++ yet to test how unwieldy that is.
With Itanium mangling somewhat functional, defining and calling
this
methods should be handled internally.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: