On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Dirk Jagdmann <[email protected]> wrote: > To me the biggest advantage of transitioning to a C++ compiler is the > availability of std::string and std::list, std::set, std::map. They are so > much > more convinient to use than equivalents from the glib or the alternatives > designed for Wireshark. Since the C++ STL classes allow a custom allocator we > can write C++ allocators for our ep_ and se_ (or the new wmem_) paradigms and > typedef Wireshark versions of the STL objects with these allocators. This > would > be my biggest immediate benefit.
That would be very nice, it's true. > I don't advocate to redesign Wireshark into a C++ object/inheritance hell at > once, although with those "features" available new developments can/might/will > use them and over time we may have better code. > > Since the QT version is already using C++, I guess that simply building > current > Wireshark with a C++ compiler is a no brainer. If we agree that this route is > worthwhile we could simply start building with C++ and develop some guidelines > how to proceed with new code, restructuring old code and maintaining/bugfixing > old code. > > The only caveat I can think of: if we build libdissectors with a C++ compiler > that might force other users of that library to switch to C++ as well (name > mangling etc). I think, at least to start, it would make sense to keep all of our library interfaces in C (so basically extern-C everything that's exposed). This prevents us from making use of a number of C++ constructs, but we don't want to go massively changing API/ABI until we have a broad consensus that the benefits outweigh the costs. Evan ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
