On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 07:26, Troels Arvin wrote: > Hello, > > Out of general programming curiosity (I'm in the proces of learning C++), > I hope that someone will be kind and comment on: > > 1. What were the main reasons for the switch from C to C++?
We had decided to move away from C to an OOP language, for programmer efficiency, and increased flexability. Java wasn't popular amongst the core... > 2. Have the reasons proven to be valid? IMO yes. Areas that have been refactored into reasonable C++, are much more amenable to extension and tweaking. Consider for example the per-user delay pools, was relatively trivial - on the back of an OOP rewrite of the prior delay pools code. > 3. Do you use STL? If not: Why? Sortof. There where some concerns about a learning curve for the non C++ savvy amongst us, plus the headache of debugging multi-page errors, which the STL being templated is prone to. > 4. Do you use exceptions? If not: Why? No. Concerns (untested) about overhead for in-stack exceptions. Fatal errors we already have a robust handling method for. Finally, it's often the case in squid that the caller of a function is no longer on the stack, due to the callback orientated nature of squid. > 5. Has the switch to C++ made the code more portable? No. Yes. It's really an orthogonal question. Some platforms don't have a good C compiler - OS/2 for example can't build the squid-cache.org code for 2.5, only a custom port. Others don't have a C++ compiler. So I think we've gained what we lost :]. That said, template instantiation on different platforms promises to be the biggest headache. > 6. Do you use templates? - In that case: Where may I see > good examples of their use in the code base? Yes, in various places. include/List.h for instance. Or include/Array.h. Or src/Generic.h. or .... I *hope* all our examples are good :}. Rob -- GPG key available at: <http://members.aardvark.net.au/lifeless/keys.txt>.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
