Article View: comp.os.os2.programmer
Article #2115Re: SOM compiler gotcha with implied metaclasses
From: Eric Giguere
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:41
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:41
14 lines
1315 bytes
1315 bytes
In article <1992Oct15.181828.26332@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>How hard is it to use separate compilation and keep most (if not all)
>of your own C code out of the files generated by the SOM compiler?
>This way, CSC files wouldn't munge any of your code.
Well, it's not really hard. This is what I'm doing now... I don't let the
SOM compiler generate any C code for me. I just make sure my methods
are defined exactly as if the SOM compiler generated them. Still, that
problem I had with the implied metaclasses can still bite you if you're not
careful. I'm putting all the metaclass stuff in a separate file.
--
Eric Giguere giguere@csg.UWaterloo.CA
So is Windows NT short for "Windows, NOT?"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<Bw86Hn.Hqq@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watserv1!csg.uwaterloo.ca!giguereReferences:
<Bw3EDL.MG5@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> <1992Oct15.181828.26332@njitgw.njit.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.programmer Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watserv1!csg.uwaterloo.ca!giguere From: giguere@csg.uwaterloo.ca (Eric Giguere) Subject: Re: SOM compiler gotcha with implied metaclasses Message-ID: <Bw86Hn.Hqq@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> Sender: news@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca Organization: Computer Systems Group, University of Waterloo References: <Bw3EDL.MG5@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> <1992Oct15.181828.26332@njitgw.njit.edu> Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:41:46 GMT Lines: 14