[C++-sig] Re: Interest in luabind

Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve rwgk at yahoo.com
Mon Jun 23 17:16:10 CEST 2003

--- Daniel Wallin <dalwan01 at student.umu.se> wrote:
> > Again I can only offer a second-hand view. IIUC, on some
> > platforms it is
> > possible to compare type_info objects across dll
> > boundaries as if they
> > are in the same static link unit. I.e. there is nothing
> > special. On some
> > platforms this is not possible, and type_id::name is used
> > instead.
> > There is only one platform where relying on type_id::name
> > caused a bit
> > of a hick-up, namely IRIX/MIPSpro. See the comment near
> > the top of the
> > flew_fwd.h file (link in my previous message).
> Ok. I guess you could unmangle the names to a standardized
> format if there are problems with this?

Yes, as a last resort we could, e.g., manually specialize
boost::python::type_info (in boost/python/type_id.h) for all types
using the cross-module feature. Fortunately that has not been
necessary so far. And I don't see why it should ever be necessary
in hypothetical new platforms since there is TTBOMK no technical reason
for enforcing inconsistent type_id::name results. I.e. if we just tell
the developers of new platforms what we are using type_id::name for
it will most be likely easy for them to give us what we need.

Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

More information about the Cplusplus-sig mailing list