Dan Kegel wrote:
>
> Gary Feldman wrote:
> > and b) should
> > object-oriented terminology be used in the documentation, as a pedagogical
> > tool? In other words (for the latter), perhaps the documentation should be
> > along the lines of: "A BIO is essentially an abstract class, but is
> > specified in C. You can implement your own particular BIO (analogous to
> > deriving an implementation class from an abstract class), by providing the
> > following functions (i.e. methods). Since this is C and not C++, you have
> > to make the methods available as follows...., and you have to explicitly
> > create (i.e. construct) and free (i.e. destroy)....
>
> I believe this would be helpful. To avoid annoying those who do not
> think in C++, it could be put into a "C++ programmer's introduction
> to OpenSSL"
That's a bit weird. It sounds as if polymorphism and virtual calls come
natural to C programmers and don't even deserve mentioning, but have to be
explained to poor C++ programmers...
--
Dimitrios Souflis [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ovrimos S.A., Greece http://www.altera.gr/dsouflis
>>TinyScheme download site: http://www.altera.gr/dsouflis/tinyscm.html
*** Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it,
*** doesn't go away (VALIS, Philip K. Dick)
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
