On 27 June 2006 at 7:00, "bootjvm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Concerning Mark's observation lsat week on AWT/Swing > where only a, "couple of files" were C++ instead of C > source code: > > I thing it would make library maintenance easier when everything is > done in one single, regular manner. If everything is C but a short > segment, it would make the world run better to not have exceptions to > the rule if they could be converted into C. Mixed language projects > in a mode like this _often_ have maintenance issues in this arena. > Therefore, I would suggest this conversion be done.
I'm looking at the integration of the native code from the awt/swing 'misc' dependency right now. I think these natives will quite likely get merged in to luni at some point. At that point, it would definitely make sense to convert them to C to avoid adding unnecessary requirements to a core element of the Harmony classlib. On the other hand I'm not quite so concerned about the use of C++ for awt - since the requirement there (for ease of use with GDI) is justified. Regards, Mark. > Dan Lydick > > > [Original Message] > > From: Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Date: 6/19/06 6:49:38 AM > > Subject: Re: awt and swing integration issues > > > > My USD0.02... > > > > 1) If I were to write a GUI toolkit, I can't imagine why I wouldn't use > > C++ given relationships like "DialogBox is a Window" > > > > 2) Isn't it a reasonably safe bet that any platform that has a GUI is > > 'advanced' enough to have a reasonable C++ compiler for it? > > > > I understand the need to stick to the simplicity of C, but I'm not > > surprised w/ the C++ > > > > Mark, are you suggesting we convert it back to C? > > > > geir > > > > Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > > 2006/6/18, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> > > >> On 18 June 2006 at 22:16, "Alexey Petrenko" > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> > 2006/6/18, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> > > c) I'm also wondering about the motivation for using C++ when I > can't > > >> > > see any pressing reason to require this. > > >> > You mean that most of the native code is C++ but not C? > > >> > > >> Yes. It seems to be a mixture of C and C++ and although I only looked > > >> at a couple of files I didn't see anything that really needed C++ > > >> features. > > >> > > >> For portability I'd stick to C if C++ isn't really required. > > > But C++ gives at least 2 benefits for developer: > > > 1. Strict type checking > > > 2. It is allow to write env->FindClass("java/lang/Object") instead of > > > (*env)->FindClass(env, "java/lang/Object") :) > > > > > > Windows version also uses GDI+ which is class library. > > > > > > So I vote for C++... > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
