Archived
This forum has been archived. Please start a new discussion on GitHub.
Slice parser question
I'm writing a new slice2* generator using the established framework (i.e. slice2cpp, slice2docbook, etc.). I'd like to have an option to generate stubs/wrappers for multiple Slice interface files in one file; for example, both slice/Ice/Current.ice and slice/Ice/Identity.ice, and I was planning on using Unit::mergeModules() to accomplish this, much like slice2docbook does. However, I'm running an include level problem -- Current.ice includes Identity.ice. If I give "Current.ice Identity.ice" as arguments to my generator, my visitStructStart() and visitStructEnd() methods get called for the Identity struct, but my visitDataMember() method does not get called. If I pass "Identity.ice Current.ice", all works as expected.
I'm going to look into the Slice parser, and see if I can put in a patch to have it update the inclue level if it is later asked to parse (as a top level document) something it has already seen via an include. However, I would assume that I shouldn't get the visitStructStart() and visitStructEnd() calls either, right? Is the parser already trying to update include levels, and just missing the data member levels?
Thanks,
-- Vlad
I'm going to look into the Slice parser, and see if I can put in a patch to have it update the inclue level if it is later asked to parse (as a top level document) something it has already seen via an include. However, I would assume that I shouldn't get the visitStructStart() and visitStructEnd() calls either, right? Is the parser already trying to update include levels, and just missing the data member levels?
Thanks,
-- Vlad
0
Comments
-
Re: Slice parser question
Er, I really need to learn to look at the code in more depth before asking questions (though being on dialup that could blow up at any moment isn't helping things ... it looks like Parser.cpp Slice::{ClassDef,Struct,...}::createDataMember() is missing an updateIncludeLevel() call in the if(_unit->ignRedefs()) { ... } block?0 -
You are right. We will fix this.0