Use Ref and OutRef for C++ delegates
#3447
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixes the issue of C++ delegates (C++ function pointer/callback types) are generated with parameters that assume ownership is passed into the function. This is fine for sys-style bindings where all types are copyable but not so for regular bindings where some times might require ownership or lifetime management. That's exactly what
RefandOutRefhandle so that's what these delegates now use for their parameters.A somewhat contrived test is provided that implements
PFNGETACTIVATIONFACTORYto verify that such delegates can be both implemented and called in Rust. This highlighted a limitation in the fact thatRefnow has no lifetime parameter (#3433 #3435) and thus makes it unsafe to construct on the call side. This is unfortunate, so I'll rethinkRefand see if we can reintroduce the lifetime for cases where this needs to be called safely.Fixes: #3446