On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 09:24:26AM +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > >"Subhobroto Sinha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > >>However, soon many of his elves found out that technologies like > >>MFC, WTL, ATL, COM, DCOM, COM+ and other MS bloops were getting too > >>complex to be implemented using plain C, and thus developments in > >>those areas were soon in limbo. > >> > >>But that could be solved using yet another language called C++ - if > >>only Santa would let it be. > >> > >> > > > >You don't need Santa's permission for that, just go ahead and > >implement DCOM in C++ and show us how easy it is. I suspect you will > >quickly realize that the complexity of the problem does not come from > >having to explicitly pass the this pointer around... > > > > > > > While You are, no doubt, right about the complexity problem, I fail to > understand the "no C++ in the wine source tree" rule.
> We are meant to pick the best tool for the job. While I 100% agree with > "no C++ in the core Windows DLLs" rule, I think some other areas make > more sense to use C++ than C. I have not been able to find the prior > discussions about this matter, though I know we had them. Read what Alexandre wrote. To paraphrase: "Feel free to write it in C++ and submit it when you are done." Ciao, Marcus
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
