Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
A labltk book?
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: skaller <skaller@u...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] A labltk book?
On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 16:23 -0400, Brian Hurt wrote:

> The problem as I understand things is that C++ doesn't play nice with
> any language that is not C++ or explicitly designed to work with C++
> (cue Skaller).  This is especially true if you use the fancy features
> of C++ like templates and operator overloading, which Qt does.  Which
> makes it much easier to use in C++, but much harder to bind to any
> other language.

Can't speak for Qt, but otherwise Brian is quite correct.
Even dumbed down C++ doesn't work well as a target language
due to a large number of 'non-orthogonalities' where some
of the few good invariants C provides are lost. Unfortunately
ISO C99 also trends that way for C as well.

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net>
Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net