Replies: 2 comments 6 replies
-
|
Adhering to RAII would be nice there, indeed. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
On a somewhat similar topic - so I just add it to this thread instead of a new And sometimes it says I was completely unfamiliar with this syntax, but apparently it's a C++11 thing (my C++ experience predates C++11) - but it initializes the struct with zero or default values. But again, wouldn't it make sense to make those types into C++ classes with a default constructor that initializes the values to zero? I'm unsure now much refactoring is necessary - but I see quite a lot of duplicated code converting a V8 value into a struct to return to the Go caller. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Looking at the code to handle errors (which I mentioned should probably also contain a v8 Value).
I also notice that the conversion itself does a bit of cleanup.
I was wondering if it would make sense to have a class in C++ to represent this information, so it would be a simple matter of calling
Maybe the type could take (my C++ is probably wrong, but I'm sure you get the idea).
More cohesive - what changes together, stays together.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions