Subj : Re: JS_AddNamedRoot
To   : netscape.public.mozilla.jseng
From : "aadamov" <aadamov@mindspring.com>
Date : Mon Jan 05 2004 12:17 am

OK, I have finally figured out that JS_AddNamedRoot had nothing to do with
defining an instance of a class in the JS context. Instead I should have
used JS_DefineObject. I can send examples to those who are interested.
Thank you.
AA

"aadamov" <aadamov@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:btaksc$iqn8@ripley.netscape.com...
> Followinf up on the previous message. I did create a generic wrapper for
DOM
> embedded in SpiderMonkey, but... Couple of buts:
> 1) I would still like to know if there is well thought through "standart"
> implementation for that;
> 2) I am stuck trying to use JS_AddNamedRoot in order to instantiate root
of
> the DOM object in JS context. In fact I run into problem using
> JS_AddNamedRoot even for standart types. For instance:
>    std::string name = "red";
>    JSString *jstr = JS_NewStringCopyN(cx, name.c_str(), name.length());
>    JS_AddNamedRoot( cx, (void*)jstr, "myRoot" );
>    std::string script = "myRoot;";
>    jsval rval;
>    uintN lineno = 0;
>    JSBool ok = JS_EvaluateScript(cx, globalObj, script.c_str(),
>                                   script.length(), "script", lineno,
&rval);
>
> Evaluating above script I get JS_FALSE return value.
> I guess it only makes sense, since I am passing a void pointer to jstr in
my
> call to JS_AddNamedRoot. How in life would runtime know what type of an
> object I just passed to it. That is unles there is some kind of reflection
> mechanism build into it. Better off going to sleep now.
>
>

.