httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Robb <sr...@wisewire.com>
Subject RE: cvs commit: apache-2.0 STATUS
Date Thu, 12 Feb 1998 22:14:01 GMT
> If you can effectively wrap a C++ API in a C API then what is the
point of
> the C++ API?
> 
> (yea, yea, to allow you to do things cleaner, to make it easier to do
> things, etc. but... you can't do much in that regard without making
the C
> API crippled)

I'd think "to allow you to do things cleaner, to make
it easier to do things" would be enough of a reason :-)

Really, though, the C API *might* be limited in comparison
to the C++ API - but there's no real need for it to be.
One possibility is having API functions that return
opaque pointers to C++ objects, that get passed back into
wrapper functions... pretty much the same state the code
is in today.

The other option is to have a C++ API built on top of
the "standard" C API that enforces additional constraints,
provides additional features, etc.

BTW - Ben, have you had a chance to play around with a
C++ verison yet?

- Samrobb (srobb@wisewire.com)
- WiseWire Corporation - The Content Agent Company
- http://www.wisewire.com
- http://www.lycos.com/webguides/webguides.html

The box said 'Requires Windows 95, or better.' So I bought a Macintosh.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Marc Slemko [SMTP:marcs@worldgate.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, February 12, 1998 4:29 PM
> To:	new-httpd@apache.org
> Subject:	Re: cvs commit: apache-2.0 STATUS
> 
> On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> 
> > Marc Slemko wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Marc Slemko wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It is also a _lot_ easier to call functions compiled from
> whatever
> > > > > language you want when you aren't using C++ magics.  It is
> reasonable to
> > > > > require that a language have certain basic functionalities.
> That is what
> > > > > is done now.  If you use all sorts of C++ features in the API,
> it is
> > > > > _very_ hard if not impossible to reasonably use object files
> compiled in
> > > > > other languages.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm. I've written stuff that makes heavy use of C++ internally,
> yet has
> > > > a C API (mostly so it can be used from BASIC, as mentioned
> earlier :-).
> > > > I don't see the problem.
> > > 
> > > This originated with talking about some C++ thing or another for
> use in
> > > the API, as I understand.  Doing that makes hell.  Simply using
> C++ in the
> > > core is a different matter.
> > > 
> > > My understanding may be wrong because I can't read and am busy.
> > 
> > I think my statement wasn't sufficiently clear. I mean I have stuff
> that
> > has a C++ API, but also has a C API (which wraps the C++ API). I
> don't
> > know what you think is difficult to deal with in this model, so it
> is
> > hard to give specific counter-examples :-)
> 
> If you can effectively wrap a C++ API in a C API then what is the
> point of
> the C++ API?
> 
> (yea, yea, to allow you to do things cleaner, to make it easier to do
> things, etc. but... you can't do much in that regard without making
> the C
> API crippled)

Mime
View raw message