On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 18:28:00 +0000, you wrote: | I can agree that authors copied Java style a bit overzealously, but | we have what we have.
It's pervasive to the point of being pernicious. | C API would be good, too, and IMHO it should not be that hard to | provide it with the current codebase, though it might simply require | a lot of typing. Yes, there's nothing wrong with implementing the library in C++ while presenting a C interface. Apart from the "lot of typing" ( by which I assume you mean translating method calls to external functions), there will also be a need to define error codes and translate exceptions to these. | Besides, regardless of its final shape I guess the project would | benefit from simplifying it, e.g. by replacing platfrom-specific | threads with std::thread. Yes, the code base should be upgraded to take advantage of the vast increases in standardization that came in with C++11 and successors. | If the "javaisms" are to be reworked into modern C++ is a matter of | taste, but if it's possible to be done step by step I guess it | should be considered I think it's more than a matter of taste. The Javaisms are a definite detriment and should be reworked. This is more than just purging gratuitous heap allocation, the most egregious offender. It extends to interfaces as well: e.g. presently, covariant return types are avoided because Java doesn't have them, which is a silly reason. There is a lot of gratuitous inheritance (Closeable, Stoppable, etc.) which serves no purpose other than code bloat. Another purge target is the profusion of #include-s, which seem motivated by an analogy with Java's import statement. And so on. | @Mike thanks for information on how to contribute, hopefully it will | become handy soon :) Seconded. :-) -- :ar
