Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 27254 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2006 11:52:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Feb 2006 11:52:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 38777 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2006 11:52:01 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 38726 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2006 11:52:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 38715 invoked by uid 99); 21 Feb 2006 11:52:01 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:52:01 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (asf.osuosl.org: 202.81.18.152 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of paulex.yang@gmail.com) Received: from [202.81.18.152] (HELO ausmtp04.au.ibm.com) (202.81.18.152) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:52:00 -0800 Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp04.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k1LBwQ5g246788 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:58:26 +1100 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (d23av04.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.237]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VERS6.8) with ESMTP id k1LBsqMV238200 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:54:52 +1100 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k1LBpZJn026130 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:51:35 +1100 Received: from d23m0011.cn.ibm.com (d23m0011.cn.ibm.com [9.181.32.74]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k1LBpY5i026077 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 22:51:34 +1100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([9.181.106.208]) by d23m0011.cn.ibm.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.53HF294) with ESMTP id 2006022119512807-10019 ; Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:51:28 +0800 Message-ID: <43FAFEBD.2010008@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:51:25 +0800 From: Paulex Yang User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [classlib] using cpp References: <43F0BCEC.8070300@gmail.com> <43F103BE.7020105@gmail.com> <906dd82e0602132053s4d689df3rfa160f1a0e3cb0bd@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <906dd82e0602132053s4d689df3rfa160f1a0e3cb0bd@mail.gmail.com> X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on D23M0011/23/M/IBM(Release 6.53HF294 | January 28, 2005) at 21/02/2006 19:51:28, Serialize by Router on D23M0011/23/M/IBM(Release 6.53HF294 | January 28, 2005) at 21/02/2006 19:51:34, Serialize complete at 21/02/2006 19:51:34 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Instead of introducing this strict language rule, I suggest to consider this restriction case by case with some principles. One of the principles should be that our codes can be easily ported to as many platforms as possible. Obviously ANSI C has more compatibility on multi platforms and is much easier to support for platform provider than C++, and because we have few native codes in classlib written by c++ so far, it's not a bad idea that we consider ANSI C as the first choice to implement native codes in classlib. And of course, if someday in some cases, the implementation by C++ is obviously much better(elegant, simple, high performance, or anything else) than counterpart by C, so that the compatibility/complexity issue introduced can be ignored, I have no objection to use C++. Mikhail Loenko wrote: > I'm OK with this change in the jaasnix. > > As for the whole classlib, I'm afraid that having such a strict > language rule at this > point might hold some potential contributors. > > Thanks, > Mikhail > > > > On 2/14/06, Tim Ellison wrote: > >> Alexey Petrenko wrote: >> >>> You suggest not to use C++ in Harmony at all? >>> >> As Geir says elsewhere, I mean in classlib in particular. >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >> -- >> >> Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com) >> IBM Java technology centre, UK. >> >> > > -- Paulex Yang China Software Development Lab IBM