Full_Name memsom at post.interalpha.co.uk
Fri Aug 17 17:50:44 CEST 2001

Quoting Michael Van Canneyt <michael.vancanneyt at wisa.be>:

> Even Kylix uses a C wrapper; I don't think it is worth the effort;
> Creating a C layer in a structured/programmed way may be much more
> simple than trying to implement full C++ support. The performance
> impact of this extra layer will hopefully be quite minimal, when
> compared to the comparative slowness of the C++ libs.

I remember some of us on this list had this discussion when Kylix came out. We 
were divided.. I remember I was quite happy to use Kylix with it's wrapped and 
flattened API, but others 'poo pooed' it. They made bold statements about how 
it wasn't a propper thing to do and how FPC would never take this approach. In 
the real world, however, things are never all that simple. A flattened API is 
better than no compiler support, so I applaud Michael's foresight. 

To be honest, at this point in time, with BeOS being in a completely unstable 
position, I can't see why we'd want to bother worrying about how the API calls 
are being made. After all, if there are no more updates to the OS, who will 
want or need the compiler?? Any support is better than zilch/nothing/nada/nil 


Version: 3.12
GCS d? s+++:+ a- C++ UL+ P L++ E---- W- N+ o+ K- w 
O- M V PS PE-- Y PGP- t- 5-- X- R- tv+ b+ DI++ D+ 
G e++ h--- r+++ y+++ 

More information about the fpc-pascal mailing list