[vtk-developers] Smart pointer declaration macro?

[Bill Lorensen]

And VTK_CREATE? And who knows what others...

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:52 PM, David Cole <david.cole at kitware.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:41 PM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:38 PM, David Doria <daviddoria+vtk at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Karthik Krishnan
>> > <karthik.krishnan at kitware.com> wrote:
>> >> Or have these as typdefs and/or factory methods in a VTK class, as is
>> >> done in ITK (that would be internally handled via macros in the
>> >> class), so that usage syntax looks like.
>> >>
>> >>  vtkPoints::SmartPointer = vtkPoints::SmartNew();
>> >> or
>> >>  vtkPoints::SmartPointer instance(1);
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:26 PM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:15 PM, David Doria <daviddoria+vtk at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> I've seen the use of something like this:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> #define SPNEW(instance, type) \
>> >>>> vtkSmartPointer<type> instance = vtkSmartPointer<type>::New();
>> >>>>
>> >>>> in many of the tests and elsewhere. It seems like a reasonable
>> >>>> savings
>> >>>> of a whole bunch of characters that appears many many times in most
>> >>>> functions. Could we standardize something like this so it can be used
>> >>>> universally without having to see this little #define in every file
>> >>>> it
>> >>>> is used in?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thoughts?
>> >>>
>> >>> Doesn't VTK have enough macros already? ;)
>> >>>
>> >>> There are other ways to reduce the repetition, without using macros:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1) Add a new constructor argument for smart pointers:
>> >>>
>> >>> vtkSmartPointer<type> instance(1); // create an smart pointer and
>> >>> allocate an object at the same time
>> >>> vtkSmartPointer<type> instance(0); // create a smart pointer with
>> >>> "null" as the initial pointer
>> >>>
>> >>> 2) Add a non-static "New" method for smart pointers:
>> >>>
>> >>> vtkSmartPointer<type> instance;
>> >>> instance.InstantiateNew();
>> >>>
>> >>> etc.
>> >>>
>> >>>   David
>> >
>> >
>> > Sure, I hate macros :)
>> >
>> > So how do we turn these good suggestions into a final conclusion and
>> > course of action?
>> >
>> > My choice/thought after seeing these initial comments is that it would
>> > be nice if ITK and VTK shared a similar style (the ::SmartPointer).
>> >
>> > Bill - there is plenty of mystery even with the additional typing :)
>> >
>> > David D.
>>
>> Actually, I'll give a "+1" to Bill's comment because I do like code to
>> be as explicit as possible.
>>
>>  David G
>>
>
> Me too. +1.
> Which sort of means eliminating all the existing SPNEW macros from test
> files, doesn't it...? :-)
>
> David C.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtk-developers
>
>
>