* We have some special handling to allow SWIG wrapping of these types:
SDFile owns the chunks and buffers within, and each object owns its
children. Copying is disallowed except from SWIG where we assume the
wrapper is handling lifetime management for its objects externally.
* Previously we would convert from python to C++ arrays immediately by
copying, and vice-versa convert TO python immediately by creating a
new python list by copying.
* This however behaves rather poorly in common situations, e.g.:
> foo.bar.append(5)
Would not append 5 to foo.bar, but copy foo.bar to a temporary, append
5 to it, then destroy it leaving foo.bar untouched.
* Instead we leave the C++ array type as a pointer for as long as we can
and instead implement the python sequence API as extensions/slots that
work in-place on the original array.
* Since these types are more prevalent than originally designed, it
makes more sense to remove the namespace for ease of typing/naming.
* Also add a specialised type 'bytebuf' for an array of bytes.
* This makes mapping easier to SWIG since there's no special casing for
namespaced arrays. Especially so for nested cases like
rdctype::array<rdctype::str> -> rdcarray<rdcstr>
* For the most part the interface is stl-compatible, but we have a few
little changes of our own for convenience.
* This class is still needed after deleting the C# UI, because we don't
want to pass C++ stl structs over module boundaries and possibly run
into hard to diagnose incompatibilities.
* The directories are flattened since the #include paths aren't
relative and instead just #include "file.h". The recommended
solution is just to flatten the directory structure.
* This can happen if the resource was not included in the capture, but
there was a descriptor passed (i.e. not NULL desc which is handled
separately) which specifies some parameters, but leaves the format
as UNKNOWN.
* This includes several fixes notably arm/aarch64 support. Although it's
unlikely to be used in practice it's useful to be able to compile
successfully.
* Not doing this could taint the state and even cause invalid read-write
conflicts to change bindings vs. what should happen, if a RT is left
bound when it shouldn't, and then an SRV is bound as NULL because it
would conflict.
baldurk