[gmpi] Re: low level API - Abstract Factory summary
- From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:25:16 -0800
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 04:19:44PM -0500, Ron Kuper wrote:
> >>>
> If this is the C API, couldn't the C++ API be made so that the Destroy()
> method is actually the destructor?
> <<<
>
> The way you do that is like this:
>
> void CFoo::Destroy()
> {
> delete this;
> }
>
> But it assumes CFoo was allocated on the heap via "new CFoo".
Well, if we aren't completely COM, maybe that works? What I mean is, if
we do a more traditional C++ wrapper for C APIs instead of a direct
pass-thru like COM, then does a more basic object management model make
sense?
Tim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules: Please stay on topic. You are responsible for your own
words. Please respect your fellow subscribers. Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.
Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe
Other related posts:
