RE: [gts-devel] Next GTS Release

[Gary R. V. S. <g.r...@wo...>]

> Gary R. Van Sickle writes:
>
>  > That's not entirely true.  One could write a C wrapper over a
> C++ library
>  > rather easily, in fact I do so in one of my 'real-life' products.
>
> Ok, thanks for the comment. But how can you use the class system of
> your C++ library from C ?
>

You mean as in deriving C classes from the C++ classes?  Well, the short
answer is you probably don't, not without a lot of hassle anyway.  But I
have to wonder how often the question would arise.

If you mean 'how do you export the interface to the C++ classes to a C
program', that's easy, you just pass in and out opaque pointers, and pass
the 'this' pointer to the wrappers explicitly.

>  > And it sure wouldn't hurt to break the dependency on glib...
>
> Hmmm, what's wrong with glib ? It's a nice little library and I would
> strongly recommend anyone programming in C to use it.
>

Well, it's not so little though, is it?  I mean, it's pulling in i18n libs
and threading libs etc, when all GTS needs is the basic abstract data
structures, which C++ provides OOTB.

> Once again, I don't want to be part of any ideological war on which
> programming language is best... That's why I like the agnostic
> approach of GTK: let everybody use his/her language of choice...
>

Nobody's trying to start a language war (well at least not me, which is
highly unusual actually ;-)).  But I have been forced by circumstances
outside my control down the path of object-orienting my C code too many
times to not warn folks that, as the old adage goes, "cheap pants never
fit".  And you gotta admit that:

   ...
   Vector3 a = b + c;
   ...

beats:

   ...
   Vector3 *a = vector3_new();
   vector3_add(a, b, c);
   ...

anyday ;-).