On Apr 23, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Dimitris Servis wrote:
>
>
> 2010/4/23 Graeme Burnett <[email protected]>
> John
>
> You may find some useful insight here: http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s15
>
> Although this refers to why they didn't do it at the time and why it's not
> wise to do it for the kernel. Has little to do with a toolkit like HDF5.
> Personally I don't mind about C or C++, you can rewrite all features of C++
> using C and in the end the efficiency of the machine code is more or less the
> same. It is mainly a matter of maintenance cost for THG. Maybe HDF6 will be
> native C++?
There isn't going to be an HDF6 (at least as a file format change) - we
think we've built in enough forward compatibility hooks that we can evolve the
file format in whatever way is needed for the foreseeable future (i.e. at least
the next 10-20 years). The implementation of the library that is used to
access the files is mainly what we are focusing on here... :-) Personally, I
think the [newish] 'D' language is a promising middle ground between C and C++.
Quincey
_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
[email protected]
http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
