stfpy: Added support to get header comments

[furuame]

Hello @bdutro,

We have a demand to get header comments from STFInstReader via stfpy. I dug into this and came up with a patch. However I’m not sure about my implementations as follows:

• I need to get a vector of strings as type for header comments. However it was stored in STFReaderBase as std::vector<ConstHandle<CommentRecord>>. It was frustrating to me to implement the same interface in Cython. I kinda cheated it to add another private data member header_comments_str_ to save comments as strings when reading the header. But not sure if that’s the best way to implement it. Do you have thoughts on this?

• I added a Cython class StringVector to accommodate the above data from STF C++ library. Not sure if I made(/wrote) it in the right convention/style. Let me know if it doesn’t work for you. Thanks!

[furuame]

I added a Cython class StringVector to accommodate the above data from STF C++ library. Not sure if I made(/wrote) it in the right convention/style. Let me know if it doesn’t work for you. Thanks!

I just renamed it to HeaderCommentsType. Should be fine now.

[bdutro]

I need to get a vector of strings as type for header comments. However it was stored in STFReaderBase as std::vector<ConstHandle>. It was frustrating to me to implement the same interface in Cython. I kinda cheated it to add another private data member header_comments_str_ to save comments as strings when reading the header. But not sure if that’s the best way to implement it. Do you have thoughts on this?

Since we generally don't need to read header comments, what if instead you only populated that vector if someone calls getHeaderCommentsString?

[furuame]

I need to get a vector of strings as type for header comments. However it was stored in STFReaderBase as std::vector. It was frustrating to me to implement the same interface in Cython. I kinda cheated it to add another private data member header_comments_str_ to save comments as strings when reading the header. But not sure if that’s the best way to implement it. Do you have thoughts on this?

Since we generally don't need to read header comments, what if instead you only populated that vector if someone calls getHeaderCommentsString?

That works for me! That’s how I did right now. So you’d suggest I could just remove the getHeaderComments method but keep getHeaderCommentsString?

[bdutro]

You can leave both methods. It doesn't hurt to give access to the underlying CommentRecords. What I'm saying is leave header_comments_str empty until someone calls getHeaderCommentsString() for the first time.

[furuame]

You can leave both methods. It doesn't hurt to give access to the underlying CommentRecords. What I'm saying is leave header_comments_str empty until someone calls getHeaderCommentsString() for the first time.

I see, will do!

[furuame]

You can leave both methods. It doesn't hurt to give access to the underlying CommentRecords. What I'm saying is leave header_comments_str empty until someone calls getHeaderCommentsString() for the first time.

Done!

[bdutro]

LGTM, thanks!