Re: [orbitcpp-list] Re: cpp branch: CORBA_Object struct hidden?

[Sam Couter <sam topic com au>]

Murray Cumming <murrayc@t-online.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-02-22 at 05:12, Sam Couter wrote:
> > * Little or no runtime overhead compared with C.
> 
> 'little' is not well-defined here. Also, I tend not to worry about
> optimisations until I know where they are useful.

You could probably substitute "Minimal" instead of "Little", if that
helps.

Some optimisations place restrictions on the design you can use (as we
see here), so it's often useful to keep them in mind from the start.

> > * Allow C programmers to use C++ objects without having to deal with any
> >     of that 'horrible C++ syntax'
> 
> I see no great advantage to this. C programmers don't seem to be
> demanding this.

No they don't. And this is CORBA, so they shouldn't need it.

The only time I used the feature was when I needed to mess with
Policies, which aren't implemented in ORBit-C++ yet. With complete
support for the C++ language mapping, it shouldn't be necessary.
-- 
Sam "Eddie" Couter  |  mailto:scouter@bigpond.net.au
Debian Developer    |  mailto:eddie@debian.org
                    |  jabber:sam@jabber.topic.com.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C

PGP signature