Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: >From: "T.J. Mather" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Would there be any interest in having a C++ library developed in parallel >>with the Java POI libraries, including POIFS, HSSF, HDF? The idea would >>be similar to how Xerces C++ and Java work, sharing a similar API and >>code structure. >> +1 I would totally be *for* this! If it were in C and not C++.
>> >>This way we would use POI in the various open-source office suites, >>including KOffice, and we could write wrappers to POI in Perl and other >>scripting languages. >> Which are largely written in C and not C++ Some challanges: There is already a PERL module on CPAN for OLE2CDF. And proponents of the GPL generally feel that APL software is *legally incompatible* >> >>Dealing with MS Office file formats is hard, so I think it makes a lot >>of sense to combine all efforts across all languages into one project. >>It seems a lot easier to translate Java code to C++ than it is to grok the >>MS Office formats, and it would help the Java project too, because bugs >>found with the MS format could be applied to both C++ and Java packages. >> or well written Object-Oriented C. (yes one can write Object Oriented software in non oop langauges) > >:-) > >What you propose is nice, although we would need to see where to position >the codebase, since Jakarta is for "solutions for the Java Platform" >(http://jakarta.apache.org/site/mission.html). > True, but there are things on Jakarta that are somewhat outside its mission. What I'd like to do is this (if the offer is serious and I'll support this in C but not C++ -- more discussion I'm sure will ensue but my reasons are sound): 1. House a C version in a special *contrib* area. 2. Work on automatic code generation as much as possible. > ><TOL> >What about exposing the POI API to C++ while keeping the codebase in Java? ></TOL> > -1 - Yuck. And virtually impossible to do well in a memory-constrained cross-platform manner. Bottom line: lets not be pedantic. Jakarta = Java but POI is POI and well if POI grows into a bigger project and into other langauges so be it. POI's mission is to open up the file formats big and wide. I can see myself coming to need a C version. So my "conditions" for supporting this 1. C not C++ 2. Code generation be used wherever possible (Java->C, XML->C) 3. C++ can be implemented via light wrappers (see gtk++) around the C 4. for now (until we overcome the political and pedantic logistical issues Jakarta==Java, etc) it live in a *special contrib* section and not be advertised *TOOOO prominantly* on the the homepage. 5. The proposer take a serious role in this and recruit at least 1 other person to help. I don't want this to drain from the other efforts. . Just complement it. Lets discuss this some more. I'm sure some of the folks on here may have strong opinions about this. In the end I think community, code and pragmatism should reign. Not pedantics (Jakarta==Java != C) and logistics (housing a C project). But again, it depends on your committment TJ. I'm all for helping YOU do this, and will probably eventually come around to contributing. But I'm not for this being a "recommendation of something for US to do on our own" ... we've got pleanty of work to do as it is. (Formulas, Graphs, Pivot Tables, NIO-MemoryMapped file alternative scheme, constricted memory scheme, Word Documents, PowerPoint.... yes I know some of these have not been mentioned....you'll see soon... later release...later ;-) ). So if this sounds like the 5th degree -- sorry but how committed are you to this TJ? -Andy > > >-- >Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - verba volant, scripta manent - > (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >
