Nathaniel handed us a link to a really interesting paper on this very topic:
http://freetype.sourceforge.net/david/reliable-c.html
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 04:18:45PM -0700, Micah Dowty wrote:
> Lalo and I have been discussing this more on IRC.
>
> The main sticking point seems to be exceptions- I
Lalo and I have been discussing this more on IRC.
The main sticking point seems to be exceptions- It would be great to use C++ as
a C-with-exceptions, but the problem with that comes in interfacing between libOm
and other components that may be in C, C++, Python, or any other language. If you
call
Well, my requirements for this language are:
- Easy to interface to low-level code for drivers
- Small and fast (those terms are relative, but it needs to be able to run
on embedded systems with as little overhead as possible)
- Low memory usage
- Easy to interface with other languages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Should the core components of Om and PicoGUI 2.0 be written in C or C++?
Are these the only choices, what about
* Objective C (sounds cool and Apple use it)
* Smalltalk (lurvely OO behaviour)
* Compiled Java (note: not interpr
Hi Everybody,
It will still be a few months yet until we're really coding Om and
PicoGUI 2.0, but this is a decision worth a discussion:
Should the core components of Om and PicoGUI 2.0 be written in C or C++?
Here are a few arguments each way:
- In favor of C:
- smaller binary size
- C++'s
