Skip to content

Conversation

@damienmarchal
Copy link
Contributor

@damienmarchal damienmarchal commented Sep 23, 2024

The problem:
Depending on the definition order of the binded classes, binding "Base", and BaseData registered after then the use of BaseData in the function signature in Base will have invalid string name. This prevent stubgen to make their work.

In the PR I propose a way to fix that.

…nows about them.

The problem:
Depending on the definition order of the binded classes, there may have
incorrect types if Base is useing BaseData... but BaseData is only binded after Base.

The PR propose a solution for that using a decidcated "forward" registration patter.
@hugtalbot hugtalbot changed the title Example on how fix type forward declaration in the binding. Example on how fix type forward declaration in the binding Oct 2, 2024
@damienmarchal
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased and passing tests.

@alxbilger alxbilger mentioned this pull request Nov 6, 2024
@hugtalbot
Copy link
Contributor

PR looks clean 👍 but I would need some insight (the link with #456)

@damienmarchal
Copy link
Contributor Author

damienmarchal commented Nov 8, 2024

In #456 was a preliminary version of the current one on BaseData. The current PR covers the whole plugin. So to me it is to merge if CI pass.

@damienmarchal damienmarchal changed the title Example on how fix type forward declaration in the binding Fix type forward declaration in the bindings Dec 6, 2024
@bakpaul
Copy link
Contributor

bakpaul commented Jan 8, 2025

@damienmarchal Could you please fix conflict on this branch so we can merge it ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants