|
From: | Paul Eggert |
Subject: | bug#34849: Compilation issues with g++ on some files |
Date: | Tue, 19 Mar 2019 19:12:24 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 |
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
I believe the intent was to make the existing code be compilable with a C++ compiler without introducing any C++ code per se.
Although that may have been the intent, the downside is that a reasonable amount of work and testing would have to be done to support it. On the Gnulib side we've had some skepticism that this would be worth the hassle; see:
https://lists.gnu.org/r/bug-gnulib/2019-03/msg00060.htmlEspecially since there is a disciplined way of using the code that (at least for Alex's need) appears to work well enough; see:
https://lists.gnu.org/r/bug-gnulib/2019-03/msg00064.html
many/most of the toolkits and packages we'd like to use or be compatible with are written in C++ (HarfBuzz is a good recent example)
Sure, but as you mentioned HarfBuzz has a C API, and we needn't tweak or revamp Emacs's C code in order to use HarfBuzz. In my experiences toolkits with a C++ API but without a C API tend to be less flexible and more of a hassle for C code to interface to, and it's not clear we should spend much time catering to them.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |