Re: [Tinycc-devel] support for OOP in C

[Jared Maddox]

> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:03:30 -0400
> From: Chris Marshall <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] support for OOP in C
> Message-ID:
>         <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jared Maddox <address@hidden>
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> >   http://ldeniau.web.cern.ch/ldeniau/cos.html
>> >   https://github.com/CObjectSystem/COS
>> >
>> > The features and capability look very good and I believe
>> > will be sufficient for PDL development save the fact that
>> > it apparently doesn't work on windows without some
>> > sort of POSIX layer (cygwin or such).  From studying
>> > the code, it appears that restriction is actually the build
>> > and not the library which only needs C99 preprocessor
>> > and C89 or greater compiler.
>> >
>> > The license is Apache.
>> >
>>
>> I haven't downloaded it, but my impression is that it's simply a
>> library. If you're wanting TCC to have OOP language extensions, then
>> I'd really suggest putting almost (or maybe literally) everything into
>> a "compile to C" branch, instead of embedding it directly into the TCC
>> C compiler.
>>
>
> My use case is for a small, portable OO system based
> on C for portability.  After reading the list archives, I apologize
> for the OT OT post and confusion.
>

So... library or language extension? I can read your reply either way,
so it's not clear.


>>
>> There are few enough developers that directly enlarging the C codebase
>> is probably not a good idea, making something like Vala a better idea.
>>
>
> Vala is interesting but too heavyweight for this application.
> Thanks for the thoughts.
>

I was just pointing to the fact that Vala compiles to C and uses a
C-based object system as the implementation of it's support for
objects, rather than suggesting the use of Vala. Sorry about that not
being clear.