Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:07:50 -0600 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net> Cc: tbuswell@acadia.net, Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: X11/C++ question Message-ID: <381785C6.C0000EF1@softweyr.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910262253040.29073-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chuck Robey wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Oct 1999 tbuswell@acadia.net wrote: > > > > > Thomas David Rivers writes: > > > If you mean Xt (and possibly Motif) - the answer is "very carefully." > > [...] > > > > You're approach would probably work, but there's an easier way. > > See topic 28 in the Xt FAQ. > > > > ftp://ftp.x.org/contrib/faqs/FAQ-Xt > > > > It's not name mangling causing problems, it's lack of "this" when the > > method is invoked as a callback from Xt. > > Yes! This is the method! I like it, or at least, it's as close (in C++ > code) to something I do like. I assume they're using a static member function for the callback and storing the this pointer for the object somewhere handy? This is the canonical way to re-enter C++ code from C land, and can even be used for C++ interrupt handlers if you're very careful. -- "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" Wes Peters Softweyr LLC wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?381785C6.C0000EF1>