On Saturday, 10 September 2022 07:05:46 PDT Karl Semich wrote: > Qt has such a strong C++ basis that I personally might take the small > performance hit of keeping C bindings more separate, to make merging > forward easier.
What performance hit? You have to wrap ALL functions and none of them can be inline. That means the performance hit is the same for all functions, whether they are static members, non-static members, constructors or destructors, or even free functions, and whether that technique is done inside of Qt or outside. I think the exercise of imagining what a C binding would look like is interesting, but I really don't think it's a useful use of our time. Using automated binding mechanisms like Shiboken for Python are interesting, but at least Python supports overloading; C doesn't. I don't see how a binding could be automated to C. It would require manual intervention for every overloaded function, of which there are many. And what's the gain here? What does one gain from compiling as C, instead of using the C++ compiler that comes with the same suite? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
