Matthew Vogt wrote:
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 20:37:18 -0700, "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> said:
I'm sympathetic to this point of view. The reason it doesn't seem so bad to me is that only a relatively small part of coding with BIL is actually defining interfaces; the code which uses the interfaces is just ordinary C++.
Yeah, but in order to write any ordinary C++ using an interface, you must first (mentally) parse the interface.
True.
Yes, you won't write much IDL, but it will be read many times...
You can always write the pseudocode together with the interface: /* struct Interface { void print(ostream&, int) const; }; */ BOOST_IDL_BEGIN(Interface) BOOST_IDL_CONST_FN2(print, void, ostream&, int) BOOST_IDL_END(Interface) Of course, you run the risk that they will get out of sync.
BTW, cool library.
Thanks.
Matt
Jonathan