Re: Trees using Inline::C

SV* get_parent(SV* obj) {
   Node *node = (Node *)SvIV(SvRV(obj));
   if(node != NULL && node->parent != NULL)
      return new(
         "Node", 
         node->parent->name,
         node->parent->desc,
         node->parent->branch_length
     );
   else 
      return NULL; // not sure
}
[download]

but i would prefer to set parent to NULL inside the new function, and add an iditional member named "class" to your struct treeNode to ensure the same class name

Comment on Re: Trees using Inline::C Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Trees using Inline::C by rvosa (Curate) on Aug 01, 2005 at 00:31 UTC
Thanks for your reply! But, is that efficient memory usage? Memory has already been allocated when: `my $parent = Node->new('Homo_neanderthalensis', 'Hominid', 5.02);` [download] was called, and it seems like this new call to `return new( /..etc.../);` [download] goes the same route? Or am I missing something? Thanks again!	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Trees using Inline::C by esskar (Deacon) on Aug 01, 2005 at 08:22 UTC
sure. you are right; but see, a (Node ) has no information about its (SV ). A workaround would be typedef struct treeNode { char* name; char* desc; char* class; //in case we need it double branch_length; SV* obj; // the perlobj SV* obj_ref; // the ref to the perlobj struct treeNode parent; } Node; SV new(char* class, char* name, char* desc, double branch_length) { Node* node = malloc(sizeof(Node)); node->obj_ref = newSViv(0); node->obj = newSVrv(obj_ref, class); node->class = savepv(class); node->name = savepv(name); node->desc = savepv(desc); node->branch_length = branch_length; node->parent = NULL; // no parent yet sv_setiv(node->obj, (IV)node); SvREADONLY_on(node->obj); return node->obj_ref; } SV* get_parent(SV* obj) { Node node = (Node )SvIV(SvRV(obj)); if(node != NULL && node->parent != NULL) return node->parent->obj_ref; else return NULL; // not sure } [download] HTH	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Trees using Inline::C by rvosa (Curate) on Aug 01, 2005 at 14:42 UTC
Thanks eskar! Will give that a try.	[reply]