Werner,
I see your point, but I think that adding obfuscation (the extra
complexity introduced by using C) to the code to support a tiny and
vanishing minority of systems without C++ is not worth the bother; such
systems would very probably not be able to run FreeType in any case
because of lack of support for 32-bit integers; and I doubt very much
whether they would have any need to rasterize glyphs.
There's an interesting discussion here
(http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/3027/is-c-suitable-for-embedded-systems)
which gives both sides of the issue, but which contains many errors and
irrelevancies... however, I respect your point of view and won't tread a
well-worn path again.
Best regards,
Graham
On 05/08/2016 09:00, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I might take a look at it, but no guarantees about my availability.
Thanks for the offer anyway :-)
I would convert it into C++, not C; C++ is a better fit, and there
is really no point in using C these days.
I disagree. As far as I know, there are still embedded systems that
don't have a C++ compiler (and probably never will). Given that
everything in FreeType is C, it would be a severe complication if just
a single file becomes C++. In other words, I would have to convert
your C++ code in C, which means double work...
As an alternative, there is
https://github.com/uwplse/crust
a Rust-to-C compiler – has anyone tried this? I don't know whether it
produces code which runs as fast as the Rust equivalent. If this
works reliably, I could imagine to have both a Rust source file and
its translation in the FreeType git repository. Unfortunately,
`crust' needs a huuuge set of preliminaries...
Werner
--
Graham Asher
founder and CTO
CartoType Ltd
graham.as...@cartotype.com
+44 (0) 7718 895191
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
