Re: [Caml-list] CamlIDL and true abstract types

[Dmitry Bely <dbely@mail.ru>]

Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> writes:

> Hello. I recently learned of CamlIDL (thanks to the list), and tried it out.
> After trying it out for a while, it seems to me that an absolutely essential
> feature is missing: abstract types.
>
> With an abstract type I mean a type whose representation is known neither at
> the C side nor in the caml world. Typically these are of the form:
>
> typedef struct Foo_ Foo;
>
> Where the actual definition of struct Foo_ is completely missing from public
> headers, or even if it is not, its structure is supposed to be an
> implementation detail. These sorts of types are needed often enough in many
> bindings, and the Caml translation for Foo* should be clear:
>
> type foo
>
> Yet somehow there seems to be no direct way for doing this within
> CamlIDL.

Read the manual more carefully :-)

typedef [abstract] void* Foo;

is what you need. Don't miss also finalize() attribute; it may be quite
useful for you.

Hope to hear from you soon,
Dmitry


-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners