> > I can work around the issue here by either (1) redeclaring in sip all
> base
> > class 'virtual' methods in all the derived classes
>
> That's not a work around - that's what you are supposed to do, ie. tell
> SIP about all the implementations.
>
Ah - ok, I've been looking at the sip qt wrap
On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 15:52:05 +0100, "Tony Lynch" wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm using SIP to wrap a large C++ library
>>
>> I wonder which one that is... :)
>
> You guessed it :-). I have to say that SIP is helping greatly in the
> wrapping process and I'm genuinely impressed at how much functionality
it'
> >
> > I'm using SIP to wrap a large C++ library
>
> I wonder which one that is... :)
You guessed it :-). I have to say that SIP is helping greatly in the wrapping
process and I'm genuinely impressed at how much functionality it's bringing.
> So it's not a bug, it's a
> conscious decision to
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 12:12:11 +0100, "Tony Lynch" wrote:
> Hi Phil
>
>
>
> I'm using SIP to wrap a large C++ library
I wonder which one that is... :)
> and am very impressed with the
> results so far - you've got an annotation for most of the use cases I'm
> interested in. However, I think I'
I think it would help if you could provide a working example of this bug.
Like a sip file which reproduces this behavior.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Tony Lynch wrote:
> Hi Phil
>
>
>
> I’m using SIP to wrap a large C++ library and am very impressed with the
> results so far – you’ve got an
Hi Phil
I'm using SIP to wrap a large C++ library and am very impressed with the
results so far - you've got an annotation for most of the use cases I'm
interested in. However, I think I've found a bug. I've copied in below
my own 'description to self' of the problem, if it is not sufficient fo
