[C++-sig] returning a wrapper instance exposed in the other module is not converted to its owner PyObject (original) (raw)
Shin-ichi MORITA shin1_morita at yahoo.co.jp
Thu Dec 15 18:04:08 CET 2005
- Previous message: [C++-sig] returning a wrapper instance exposed in the other module is not converted to its owner PyObject
- Next message: [C++-sig] returning a wrapper instance exposed in the other module is not converted to its owner PyObject
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi David and Roman,
I'm confused! You say "If you override init(), you must call module1.Derived.init()", don't you?
But I do NOT override init() here.
Again... everything is ok except for module1. Please check out "test_owner.tar.bz2" which I sent before.
Anyway, my concern is "boost::python::detail::wrapper_base should be polymorphic? (or should have virtual destructor?)".
Thanks.
David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
> I think that init() is implicitly called because > init() is not overriden.
It is not. Listen to Roman.
STOP HIV/AIDS. Yahoo! JAPAN Redribbon Campaign 2005 http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/redribbon/
- Previous message: [C++-sig] returning a wrapper instance exposed in the other module is not converted to its owner PyObject
- Next message: [C++-sig] returning a wrapper instance exposed in the other module is not converted to its owner PyObject
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]