Proposal for "nested typemap" syntax.

git-svn-id: https://swig.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/swig/trunk/SWIG@4918 626c5289-ae23-0410-ae9c-e8d60b6d4f22
This commit is contained in:
Matthias Köppe 2003-06-23 14:05:58 +00:00
commit a5ad097f5e

26
TODO
View file

@ -97,6 +97,32 @@ defer ready to go. The primary obstacle lies in the target language
multi-arguments typemaps. The same will hold for "out" typemaps
and all the others.
Comment by mkoeppe:
I think we need to be careful to keep the syntax readable.
I would like to get a syntax that is close to that of
typemap definitions. So consider this typemap:
%typemap(in) int { ... }
I would like to refer to this typemap like this:
$typemap(in, input=x) int = foo;
Here $input would be replaced by the given keyword argument
x, and $1 would be replaced by foo.
This syntax would extend easily to multi-typemaps:
%typemap(in) ( int FIRST, double SECOND ) { ... }
-> $typemap(in, input=x) int FIRST = foo, double SECOND = bar;
The advantage of this syntax would be that the formal
arguments (int FIRST, double SECOND) are close to the
actual arguments (foo, bar).
*** Add attributes to the %feature directive. Something like:
%feature("except", throws="OutOfMemoryException")