On 28/11/2012, at 7:55 AM, Raoul Duke wrote: > and (clueless question here) is not part of the problem also that if > you ever want C/++ to be calling into Felix-generated stuff, and it > doesn't follow standard C/++ calling, then things could be busted?
Yes precisely. Felix is designed to retain the C++ object model. Sure, the syntax is different but underneath its really an exceptionally fantastic macro processor that can capture C/C++ idioms. In other words, its as compatible with C/C++ as possible in terms of execution, even though we have given up on C++ syntax is one of the worst features of the language we want to fix. Otherwise, well, Felix IS C++. The compromise was designed to allow reuse of C/C++ libraries and in particular to allow the USER programmer to create their own bindings to these libraries, and also construct DSSLs to represent idioms. The reason for doing this was to attract C++ programmers. I should have known better. Programming "communities" are fiercely conservative. So that part of the design goal is a failure. Scala makes the same compromise targeting the JVM. The difference technically is that there are a lot more disgruntled Java programmers than C++ ones. C++ is actually reasonably capable, Java is not. -- john skaller skal...@users.sourceforge.net http://felix-lang.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net _______________________________________________ Felix-language mailing list Felix-language@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/felix-language
