From -7282059927632794225 X-Google-Thread: f78e5,b53358bee20fa31 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!peer1.news.newnet.co.uk!194.159.246.34.MISMATCH!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!stump.algebra.com!devnull From: francis.glassborow@btinternet.com (Francis Glassborow) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Proposal for ISO C/C++: Extensions for Portable Compilation and Linkage Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:51:39 GMT Lines: 83 Sender: mail2news@demon.net Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: news.news.demon.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1197485504 24323 158.152.254.254 (12 Dec 2007 18:51:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 18:51:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: std-c++@mailman.ucar.edu X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ucar.edu X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.csse.unimelb.edu.au (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/Submit) id lBCIpdrI001411; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 05:51:39 +1100 (EST) X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 05:37:19 -0600 X-Delivered-To: std-c++@mailman.ucar.edu X-Authentication-Warning: serv1.gc.ams.giganews.com: news set sender to poster@giganews.com using -f X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser X-Postfilter: 1.3.36 X-SMTP-Auth: no X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.std.c++:9803 Andre Kaufmann wrote: > Michael Aaron Safyan wrote: >> Andre Kaufmann wrote: >>> Michael Aaron Safyan wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> 1.) Objective-C uses "#import", so this would break Objective-C and >>>> Objective-C++. >>> >>> Keeping both C and C++ in sync would restrict and delay the evolution >>> of C++ IMHO too much, too much discussions on both sides ;-). >> >> The majority of the Apple code base is implemented in Objective-C, and >> Objective-C++ is a big deal for development on OS X. Breaking >> Objective-C and Objective-C++ in this way, where it could be easily >> avoided (simply by selecting an alternative word), would -- I suspect >> -- greatly displease the people at Apple as well as all corporations >> which have developed applications for the Mac. > > I didn't speak of breaking but of keeping in sync. If you introduce > another keyword in C++ and wait till it's specified in C also you will > wait a long time. > >>> >> [...] >> 1.) Libraries may vary from version to version. For example, "libxml" >> may add functions in one version which are not available in previous >> versions, or it may even remove "deprecated" functions from newer >> versions. > > Yes. Then it won't run, since it can't bind dynamically to the dll on > runtime. That's a general problem. > >> 2.) Libraries may vary from installation to installation. For example, >> the presence of "WxWidgets" depends largely on whether the user has >> downloaded and installed "WxWidgets" and not upon the operating system. >> >> >> The presence of libraries and header files depends on more than just >> the computer's operating system. It is already possible to detect the >> target machine's operating system with, albeit non-standard, >> predefined macros. However, since libraries and headers depend on the >> local configuration, this is not sufficient. > > May be, but by detecting > > if exist > > you don't know which platform of Windows you want to compile to either. > Win98, Win2000, Win2003, Windows CE, Win32, Win64 ? > You additionally would need macros too. > > >>> >>> a) Testing for the existence of different libraries needs time. >>> Especially if you use your "exists" proposal in a header file, >>> which is included multiple times >> >> 1.) This testing is already done with the GNU Autotools. > > Yes, as a kind of preprocessing. > >> 2.) This testing would take less time than with the GNU Autotools, >> because there is a tendency to perform unnecessary tests in the event >> that a header file may later become necessary. > > But would take more time as macros if the header file is used multiple > times. Here we have the basic problem of C++, get rid of that nasty > header files. They aren't worth it and I'm tired of dealing with > precompiled header files. > Well they will not go away entirely (not least because of the need to maintain legacy code, but the modules proposal that has been put off for a TR (we did not have the resources to deal with it as part of the current revision of C++) will largely remove the need to use them for application level programmers. --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]