Re: Gnucash c++
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:04:00 -0700
John Ralls jra...@ceridwen.us wrote:
Hello all,
What is the motivation for compiling everything as C++ if it's still
really C and you have to wrap everything in extern C {} to get it
to link, especially in gnome and register directories, which can't be
converted to C++?
when I visited #gnucash the other day I heard about the plan to (slowly) move
to C++.
Although I'm aware that I do not have 'currency' to influence the switch, I'd
just like to give my 0.02hrk (1$ ~ 5.8hrk) and propose to (just) consider using
Go language instead.
Here is nice article http://talks.golang.org/2012/splash.article explaining
about the reason to conceive the language which is solving some of the
performance problems encounted when building large C++ apps.
Moreover, it is meant to be easily approachable for the developers being
familiar with C (which is not really the case with C++) and we could say that
Go is kind of 'modern C'.
Not wanting to go deeper into any sort of argumentation being more than happy
that Gnucash is givne to me for free this is just attempt to my side in order
to provide some feedback to make GC even better developer-wise.
Sincerely,
Gour
--
The work of a man who is unattached to the modes of material
nature and who is fully situated in transcendental knowledge
merges entirely into transcendence.
http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Gnucash c++
Gour g...@atmarama.net writes:
On Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:04:00 -0700
John Ralls jra...@ceridwen.us wrote:
Hello all,
What is the motivation for compiling everything as C++ if it's still
really C and you have to wrap everything in extern C {} to get it
to link, especially in gnome and register directories, which can't be
converted to C++?
when I visited #gnucash the other day I heard about the plan to (slowly) move
to C++.
Although I'm aware that I do not have 'currency' to influence the switch, I'd
just like to give my 0.02hrk (1$ ~ 5.8hrk) and propose to (just) consider
using
Go language instead.
Ummm.. No.
The benefit of C - C++ is that except for a few minor issues with
keywords you can *generally* compile C code using the C++ compiler and
it will *just work*. The same cannot be said for Go or any other
language.
Please read the FAQ entry on Why don't you (re)write GnuCash in your
favorite language at http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/FAQ
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
warl...@mit.eduPGP key available
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Gnucash c++
On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:21:59 -0400 Derek Atkins warl...@mit.edu wrote: Ummm.. No. OK. The benefit of C - C++ is that except for a few minor issues with keywords you can *generally* compile C code using the C++ compiler and it will *just work*. That's clear. The same cannot be said for Go or any other language. Btw, Go team converts Go compiler from C to Go. ;) Please read the FAQ entry on Why don't you (re)write GnuCash in your favorite language at http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/FAQ Well, being in #gnucash I got the feeling that there is plan to abandon glib, rewrite the engine and possibly even to consider Qt 'cause without glib, one is not tied so much to GTK any longer. Considering that C -- C++ (and taking advantage of it) might be more strange than C -- Go which is created to be picked easily by C devs, I did throw my suggestion. Otoh, I believe that C -- C++ is not to be done in order to just increase build time.* :-) * Rob Bike from the Go team says that long build times (~45mins) for C++ * projects was the time when Go was conceived. ;) I'm aware of FAQ entry, but was thinking that GC is on the verge of possible (partial) rewrite. All the best! Sincerely, Gour -- One who sees inaction in action, and action in inaction, is intelligent among men, and he is in the transcendental position, although engaged in all sorts of activities. -- An intelligent person does not take part in the sources of misery, which are due to contact with the material senses. O son of Kuntī, such pleasures have a beginning and an end, and so the wise man does not delight in them. http://www.atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Gnucash c++
On Aug 13, 2014, at 3:42 PM, Gour g...@atmarama.net wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:21:59 -0400 Derek Atkins warl...@mit.edu wrote: Ummm.. No. OK. The benefit of C - C++ is that except for a few minor issues with keywords you can *generally* compile C code using the C++ compiler and it will *just work*. That's clear. The same cannot be said for Go or any other language. Btw, Go team converts Go compiler from C to Go. ;) Please read the FAQ entry on Why don't you (re)write GnuCash in your favorite language at http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/FAQ Well, being in #gnucash I got the feeling that there is plan to abandon glib, rewrite the engine and possibly even to consider Qt 'cause without glib, one is not tied so much to GTK any longer. Considering that C -- C++ (and taking advantage of it) might be more strange than C -- Go which is created to be picked easily by C devs, I did throw my suggestion. Otoh, I believe that C -- C++ is not to be done in order to just increase build time.* :-) * Rob Bike from the Go team says that long build times (~45mins) for C++ * projects was the time when Go was conceived. ;) I'm aware of FAQ entry, but was thinking that GC is on the verge of possible (partial) rewrite. All true, but you missed Derek's point. The advantage of C++ is that one can use it with C *in the same file*. That means I can take a C file, tell the compiler it's really a C++ file, and compile it almost as-is (that's what Aaron's change is about, cleaning up all of the almosts). Then I can make a C++ class and move the functionality into it one function at a time, converting the C function to a wrapper with C linkage. I can test that against the existing C tests, add C++ tests, and move on to the next function. The rest of GnuCash can't tell anything's changed; new work now has two versions of the API to use depending on whether it's completely new or a modification of existing. If it comes time to start the release cycle and the conversion isn't complete, we can ship it as-is because nothing's broken. There other languages like that, but they're all AFAIK tied to particular proprietary platforms to some extent: Objective C and Apple, C# and Microsoft, Vala and Gtk+. C++ is ISO-standard with an extremely active committee. Regards, John Ralls ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
