On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 12:35 PM, Branko Èibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
>
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>
> > 2008-04-24 21:10:35 Karl Fogel napisa³(a):
> >
> >
> > > brane_at_tigris.org writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > > --- trunk/notes/wc-ng-design Thu Apr 24 12:04:37 2008
> (r30772)
> > > > +++ trunk/notes/wc-ng-design Thu Apr 24 12:07:54 2008
> (r30773)
> > > > @@ -267,6 +267,9 @@ One way to prevent the lengthy 'if()' bl
> > > > to design a dispatch mechanism based on the path-state in
> WORKING/BASE and the
> > > > required transformation, dispatching to (small) functions which
> perform
> > > > solely that specific task.
> > > > +#####XBC Do please note that this suggests yet another instance of
> > > > + pure polymorphism coded in C. This runs contrary to the
> > > > + developer sanity requirement.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Are we positive that wc-ng can't introduce C++?
> > >
> > >
> >
> > For backward compatibility C++ rather cannot be introduced only in already
> > existing public functions.
> >
> >
>
> Wait, the public API is totally orthogonal to the implementation language.
> Its trivial to expose a pure C API from something written in C++ or Python
> or Java or you-name-it.
It's trivial to expose a pure C API. It's not trivial to write the
build system and make sure it works ~everywhere, and to make the
memory models match up. Not impossible, certainly not trivial.
--dave
--
David Glasser | glasser@davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
Received on 2008-04-25 00:03:22 CEST