Received: by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id PAA23465; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 15:33:27 -0700 Received: from fully.organic.com by taz.hyperreal.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA23459; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 15:33:25 -0700 Received: from localhost (brian@localhost) by fully.organic.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id WAA11104 for ; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 22:37:47 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: fully.organic.com: brian owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 15:37:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Brian Behlendorf To: Apache Mailing List Subject: Re: C++ components? In-Reply-To: <9607232117.aa17990@gonzo.ben.algroup.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-new-httpd@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@hyperreal.com On Tue, 23 Jul 1996, Ben Laurie wrote: > 1. Would anyone object if I C++-proofed Apache? This would probably not be > much more than the odd extern "C" in the headers. Probably wouldn't mind. > 4. Do any of you actually like C++? I didn't have a ball with it when I had to use it in college. I ended up making every private data member public. :) > 6. Would there be any interest in creating a completely C++ Apache? If we can enable C++ modules without it (which is sounds like we can) then I'd probably be opposed to this because of the performance hit. If we want to recode it I suggest we start with a different language alltogether, and hopefully Java can live up to its potential and be that language. If not, though, I don't think we're running into limitations of C anytime soon. Brian --=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- brian@organic.com www.apache.org hyperreal.com http://www.organic.com/JOBS