Josh Arnold
2007-06-15 20:58:18 UTC
You're right that ValueBase should be scoped. However, your C++ compiler
is broken if it doesn't accept the unscoped form, since the class is
derived from CORBA::DefaultValueRefCountBase, which is derived from
CORBA::ValueBase. The compiler should pick up ValueBase from the
inheritance.
Thanks for your quick response! I'm using MSVC 6, so I'm not surprised thatis broken if it doesn't accept the unscoped form, since the class is
derived from CORBA::DefaultValueRefCountBase, which is derived from
CORBA::ValueBase. The compiler should pick up ValueBase from the
inheritance.
there are compiler quirks. ;)
On a related note, I also have a scoping problem with submodules named
"CORBA". Such modules get created by the java-to-idl specification. An
example is "org::omg::boxedRMI::CORBA::seq1_WStringValue", the java-to-idl
mapping for a java String array.
The problem is that when the generated classes for seq1_WStringValue
reference a type such as "CORBA::ULong", the compiler tries to resolve it to
"::org::omg::boxedRMI::CORBA::ULong" rather than "::CORBA::ULong". Again,
this is MSVC 6, so it might not be correct behavior.
For the moment I'm getting around this by postprocessing the generated
classes to convert instances of "CORBA::" to "::CORBA::" (being careful not
to touch existing instances of "::CORBA::").
Thanks again,
Josh
_________________________________________________________________
Dont miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes from Microsoft
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0540003042mrt/direct/01/