Subject: Re: pointers & handles
From: Kevin Cameron x3251 (Kevin.Cameron@nsc.com)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 10:55:15 PST
I have no objection to individual implementations using pointers if they
can, however an interface that depends on it won't work in general. If
the interface is specified such that all calls can be macro-definintions
then it should work either way.
Direct:
#define svcGetArrElemPtr2(my_value,MyType,h,i,j)\
my_value = *(MyType *)VCSsvGetArrElemPtr2(h, i, j);
#define svcPutArrElemPtr2(my_value,MyType,h,i,j)\
*(MyType *)VCSsvGetArrElemPtr2(h, i, j) = my_value;
Indirect:
#define svcGetArrElemPtr2(my_value,MyType,h,i,j)\
NSCsvGetArrElemPtr2(&(my_value), h, i, j);
#define svcPutArrElemPtr2(my_value,MyType,h,i,j)\
NSCsvGetArrElemPtr2(&(my_value), h, i, j);
NB: Macro definitions generally don't take "..." arguments.
Kev.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 10:55:50 PST