discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Objective-C++?


From: Philip Mötteli
Subject: Re: Objective-C++?
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 10:14:07 +0200

Am Dienstag, 08.04.03, um 00:19 Uhr (Europe/Zurich) schrieb Chris B. Vetter:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2003 23:53:34 +0200
Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <lars.sonchocky-helldorf@hamburg.de> wrote:
Am Montag, 07.04.03 um 20:35 Uhr schrieb Topher:
I've been perusing the internet for some concrete and current
information about whether or not it's possible to patch gcc to
enable Objective-C++ ala Apple's compilers.  Has anyone tried it? 
If so, does it work successfully? 
I think this is planned for gcc3.4 anyway (after they have the new C++
parser) or I am wrong here?

That's the current status.

Though I'm not sure whether why you would WANT to mix both (apart from
the "Apple does it" argument).

I'm just writing an interface library for an OODBMS. If I succeed, it will be the most transparent, distributed persistence layer available for ObjC programmers. (And all open-source – including the server.) There are already interfaces available for C++, Java and C#. Because the original author didn't want to write an interface library for such a rarely used language like ObjC, I have to write it myself. Though there's few documentation, I already have advanced quite a lot thanks to ObjC++: I just reuse 99% of the C++ interface. Not only, it would have been impossible otherwise, but now, it's even faster, because C++ is faster. Everyday I'm thanking Apple for ObjC++. I would never do something in C++ myself. For me, it's a nightmare. But if somebody wants to go through that nighmare, than we could profit by reusing it, because it runs faster. The only tricky thing is to write the wrapper objects.


But I guess that's begging for flames ;-)

So you don't want my persistent library available for you?   ;-)


Re
Phil





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]