On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 12:30:50AM -0800, Philip Brown wrote: > Are you saying that C++ somehow allows for more code sharing between > drivers than straight ANSI C?
If you think that the used computer language is so irrelevant, then why is there such a great number of them? Or are you saying that C is the best suited language for every task out there? I've already programmed in Assembly, Basic, C, C++, Fortran, Lisp, Matlab, Pascal, Python, and although some of these have little more to offer than a different syntax, there are others which can considerably aid the developer for certain tasks (optimization, simplicity, numeric efficiency, small footprint interpreted language, OOP, rapid application development, etc.) The C language clearly outstands from the remaining because it can be used for low-level programming and for the availability of compilers for virtually any platform, but C++ can do everything that is done in C, plus facilitates OOP, and thanks to gcc there is no lack of C++ compilers for our target platforms. For the record, the languages I code most nowadays are C and Python. > I can buy into a statement that, due to C++'s encouragement of OOP > behaviour, shared code can become more prevalant in C++ than in C. > However, I do not hold with the view that C++ intrinsically "allows" for > more code sharing. > If you're going to rewrite the code in C++ to facilitate code sharing... > you could just as well rewrite the code in better ANSI C to facilitate > code sharing. You must think were are all very naive to expect that we'll only reimplement the drivers in a new language... Did you bother reading the examples I gave in the Doxygen generated docs before saying this nonsense? I don't think so, because most of few classes I tryied to show where *exactly* new objects which have no parallel in the current C code and will substantially improve code reusability. Although the concepts aren't new, there are no objects in the current C code for things like "vertex formats" or "DMA engines", and "state atoms" only exist in Radeon and have not been generalized, and this is just a small part. Of course all this could be done in C, but it *isn't* in my POV the appropriate language for the task. It would take more effort coding (both the framework and the drivers) using C and I see no reason why not use C++. José Fonseca __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
