[vtk-developers] [Paraview-developers] Moving vtkMemberFunctionCommand to VTK

Utkarsh Ayachit utkarsh.ayachit at kitware.com
Tue Oct 5 22:16:51 EDT 2010


I agree. Let's leave the vtkObjectBase requirement then.

Utkarsh

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 8:29 PM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dangling pointers can be a big headache for application developers.
> I think that an implementation without weak pointers would be
> a mistake.
>
>  David
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Utkarsh Ayachit
> <utkarsh.ayachit at kitware.com> wrote:
>> Yes, right now I am requiring the handler is a vtkObjectBase subclass.
>> Makes it easier to avoid dangling pointers. What do you guys think?
>> Should we not require it to be a vtkObjectBase? That however means
>> that user has to be careful about deleting objects that may have a
>> handler registered.
>>
>> Utkarsh
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:35 PM, David Doria <daviddoria at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:24 PM, David Gobbi <david.gobbi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:12 PM, David Doria <daviddoria at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well done Utkarsh!
>>>>>
>>>>> The only issue is that there are hundreds of warnings like this when
>>>>> building VTK:
>>>>
>>>> Those are just because "obj" is used as a local variable in the
>>>> operator() method, if the variable is renamed the warnings will
>>>> disappear.
>>>>
>>>>  David
>>>>
>>>
>>> Utkarsh,
>>>
>>> I tried to use this to set a function of a Qt form as the observer but
>>> it complains that:
>>>
>>> Common/vtkObject.h:252: error: cannot convert ‘Form*’ to ‘vtkObject*’
>>> in argument passing
>>>
>>> which I'm assuming means the class is not derived from vtkObject
>>> (which is true). Is this is required condition for this to work?
>>>
>>> David D.
>>>
>>
>



More information about the vtk-developers mailing list