Mailing-List: contact dev-help@corinthia.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:26:23 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAK2iWdT0Gb6P3wg564sWK6yJyrt8Hi_ad0k6FnnYTmZHTtfSFw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: C99 versus C++ (limited)
From: jan i <jani@apache.org>
To: "dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org" <dev@corinthia.incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158bb206dbe22051cf34113

--089e0158bb206dbe22051cf34113
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi

Peter and I talked the other day and among others about the benefits of
using C++ instead of sticking to C99.

This would be a major change in the project (less in the code, more in the
"how to"), and it is
not something we should "just" do.

I favor C++, but not unlimited, I see 2 places where C++ can give us more
stable code:
- Interfaces.
Using classes to group our functions (like e.g. platform, core, filters/odf
etc.),
would make it very clear where the function originates. It would also allow
group global variables that are private to the rest of the world.
I would not use real interface classes, for our internal grouping, that is
not needed. But e.g. the DocFormats API should be a real interface class
- Automatic.
At the moment we have a lot of code managing construction/deconstruction,
that could be totally automated by use of C++ smart pointers.
- Object model (filters, flat and core)
would be more logically represented as objects, and suddenly copying etc.
would be a lot easier.

I would not like to see big inheritance (especially not multiple
inheritance).

I fail to see what we loose by making the change, but please give your
opinion.

rgds
jan i.

Ps. This is in no way a vote thread, but simply a way to gather opinions.

--089e0158bb206dbe22051cf34113--