On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Felipe Magno de Almeida <felipe.m.alme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Currently, writing modules for enlightenment using C++ is not possible > without modifying headers from enlightenment. > > How is the policy for these headers w.r.t C++ compatibility? > > The most common problems are: > * Lack of extern "C"; > * The use of C++ keywords, e.g., class (replaced for klass); > * Functions and macros defined in the header with implicit conversion > from unrelated pointer types; > * Typedefs before definition or declaration of the typedef'ed UDT.
I find intriguing why would anyone create an enlightenment module in c++. What are the advantages? I think that if someone steps up to maintain the C++ compatibility and send useful modules to the project, it would be welcome. I don't think doing only the first one makes much sense. Anyway, not my call to decide. Lucas De Marchi ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
