[C++-sig] Re: Injected constructors
dave at boost-consulting.com
Wed Jul 23 19:12:04 CEST 2003
"Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk at yahoo.com> writes:
> --- David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
>> .def("__init__", init_factory(x_factory))
> I don't like the "init" duplication. Would this be possible?
> This would also make sense to me:
> .def("__init__", factory(x_factory))
> But I like the first alternative better because it is more formal
> and prevents frustrating debugging sessions due to stupid typos
> like .def("_init__", factory(x_factory)).
> Yet another idea:
> It means expanding the class_<> interface, but I think the purpose
> is unique enough to warrant the additional member function.
Actually, we're trying to avoid bloating it even more. Joel is about
to commit a simple mechanism which even allows us to move the
pickle_suite functionality out of class_.
More information about the Cplusplus-sig