CD Burning Library

["Marc Boris Dürner"]

On Wednesday 03 December 2003 00:15, you wrote: 
> Marc Boris Dürner wrote: 
> > I agree with this. Even though for many languages you dont even need a 
> > legacy-C 
> > interface. gcc can mix objc and c++ and java freely. 
> 
> I am not sure about this statement. As far as I know only Apples adopted 
> version of gcc is able to mix C++ and Objecive-C. There are ongoing 
> activities to merge this back into the standard gcc. As for Java I 
> really don't know. 
 
Well, you got to know about ObjC (seeing your post about GNUstep). As for
Java there is 
a C++ native interface. However I should relativate the term "mix freely" a
bit. While most 
stuff works, a nested template class probably wont work yet. 
 
>  From this point of view having a pure C library still gives you the 
> best choice of languages. 
 
But it gives you a bad library. Why isnt GNUstep written in C if its so
great? Why does only 
a minority actually like glib? Or even better, when C libraries are so great
why dont we 
build a desktop around wine? 
A c++ library with C compatibility layer gives you a good library and
accomodates 
languages that have only a primitive native interface such as perl. 
 
regards, 
Marc 
 
BTW, I think GNUstep is great because its not plain C :) 

-- 
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
Neu: Preissenkung für MMS und FreeMMS! http://www.gmx.net