Re: Strange factory for wxAda

["Lucretia" <lucretia9@lycos.co.uk>]

> > At the moment, I'm not even thinking about tasking, this will have to
> > be thought about later, when I turn my event handler into some sort of
> > protected object, which will be tricky considering that that is called
> > from C++ :-/
>
> Careful. You really need to think about tasking early on, because it is
> extremely hard to graft it on afterwards. Now, you may decide that it simply
> isn't worth it, and decide to restrict the uses to one task (as GWindows
> does, for instance), but it's best to decide on the approach right away.

Yeah, I know it would be difficult to stick in later, but seeing as
wxAda is in very early stages at the moment, e.g. code rearranging,
getting a very basic app working, etc. to find out what raelly needs to
be done to make a usable library.

Basically, at this moment in time, it would be easy to rearrange the
code I do have to fit it around any major changes.

I also do want to be able to use the tasking features of Ada, this way
I don't need to wrap wxThread, wxMutex, etc. I haven't touched tasking
for a long time (not since university!) so I'd need to get all that
sorted inside my own head (again). I have a question about this, but I
need to think about it some more with the code I have in wxAda for
handling the events from the C++ side to the Ada side, so I'll sort
that out and bring it over later or tomorrow.

> That's what I meant. If you want to do the allocation yourself, you really
> don't want any dangling references. So you might want to do whatever it
> takes to avoid them (that means making the type limited and not using any
> access types in your client interface).

Yeah, I have a smart pointer type in my 3D engine code (I think), I can
nab that ;-D

Currently the wxAda type is derived from Limited_Controlled so yu
cannot copy them, but you can grab the addresses, and after some of
your advice, I changed the code so that the access types are grabbed
inside wxAda. I suppose I could wrap these in my smart pointer type and
store them, that might make sense.

> In any case, this seems like a tough problem, which I'm glad I don't need to
> solve. :-)

Yeah, lucky you! ;-D

Thanks,
Luke.