How can I tell JavaCPP to ignore this macro?

[nyholku]

OCC has a nasty way of adding code to a class like with a macro DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC like this:

class Standard_Transient
{
public:
  // Standard OCCT memory allocation stuff
  DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC

public:

  //! Empty constructor
  Standard_Transient() : count(0) {}

I've tried to skip this, but I can figure out a regexp that would not also skip everything starting from next public: also.

infoMap.put(new Info("Standard_Transient.hxx").linePatterns("public:","\\s+DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC").skip());
``

Ideally I would like to replace the DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC a null C++ class member like `void somename(){}` but skipping those lines would be enough.

[saudet]

We can redefine macros as explained here:
https://github.com/bytedeco/javacpp/wiki/Mapping-Recipes#redefining-the-code-of-a-macro
In this case, something like this should work:

infoMap.put(new Info("DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC").cppText("#define DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC void somename(){}"));

[nyholku]

Thanks. I've seen and tried that before. Did not work.

If I do :

infoMap.put(new Info("DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC").cppText("#define DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC void somename(){}"));

Then javacpp will try to generate call to somename and that of course fails. Addings .skip() to above has no effect.

The root problem is that because of the double public: in the header file. I cannot leave the macro empty because then we have public:public: which the parser does not like (not sure if it is valid C++ either). So I was searching for something that would ignore everthing from the first public: to the DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC inclusive, or some harmless but valid C++ declaration to take its place.

[saudet]

If you just want to have it ignored, erase the right part of the definition like this:

infoMap.put(new Info("DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC").cppText("#define DEFINE_STANDARD_ALLOC"));

I'm sure we can have public:public:, that's fine.

[nyholku]

Thanks, that did the trick! I was pretty sure I tried that before but apparently there was something else wrong at that time.