Re: What to do with builtin functions not in libinterp subdirectory

[John W. Eaton]

On 03/18/2013 12:50 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:

> You are thinking then that the DEFUN family can remain in the code? Or
> eventually change that over? I suppose it really isn't the use of the
> DEFUN that creates a challenge; it's the macro pre-processing.

Is it a problem if there is a macro that generates the class?  It's a 
lot less typing and would keep the class definitions consistent.  But 
I'm not sure I see the point of making this change.  Using a class just 
trades a lot of mangled function names for a lot of classes in the 
global namespace.

Is the only real advantage that there is some automatic way of inserting 
the function pointers in the global table table of built-in functions 
without having to generate something like builtins.cc?  I think you will 
need some kind of singleton object to achieve that without having some 
order of initialization problems.

jwe