Re: Is ObjC++ still in time for 4.0?

[Gregory John Casamento <greg_casamento@yahoo.com>]

See below...

--- Phil Edwards <phil@codesourcery.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 02:40:33PM -0800, Gregory John Casamento wrote:
> > Guys..   This type of outburst is atypical coming from me, but I must say
> > this...
> > 
> > Argh!!  C'mon... c'mon... c'mon...  ObjC++ has been perpetually forthcoming
> for
> > the past two years!   What does it take to get Objective-C++ in?    It has
> been
> > so frustrating waiting for this.  There is *so much software* which would
> be
> > trivial to reuse once this is done.
> > 
> > Please, just get past all of the politics and get it in!
> 
> Lots of screaming and yelling about "just do it," but nobody in the ObjC++
> community so far has answered the objections brought up the last time.
> 
> Politics aren't what's keeping it out.  Front-ends aren't popularity
> contests; the GCC maintainers aren't going to suddenly start checking in
> troublesome code just because X number of potential users really, really
> want it.  If you want it in 4.0, then start answering questions and propose
> cleaner designs than the ones so far.
> 

Given that it works in Apple's version of GCC since about 2.7.2.1 (the oldest
version of the compiler I've got on my old NeXT machine) and in the current gcc
3.3.x on my Mac, tells me that there's a way to get this done.   And, Yes, I'm
aware of the differences between the NeXT and GNU runtimes.

I realized that "Front-ends aren't popularity contests" but that doesn't change
the face that Geoffrey Keating said he would "need to think about it" nearly
two months ago now with absolutely no visible progress since.   

Please understand that the lack of ObjC++ support is a *SERIOUS* impedement to
the GNUstep project as without ObjC++ we can only interface with C++ based
libraries by building a C bridge.   It also stops us from porting many apps and
frameworks which would be trivial if ObjC++ was present.  ObjC++ has been
"forthcoming" for the past two years and to see it sidelined yet again is, to
say the least, extremely frustrating because it only means that MORE will
change in the gcc baseline making it more difficult to merge from the
objectivec-improvements branch in the future.

If I had the time, I would help with this, but I am already on three free
software projects as it is.

Later, GJC

=====
Gregory John Casamento 
-- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A Maryland Corporation)
#### Maintainer of Gorm for GNUstep.