khan@nvpna1.UUCP (Osman Khan 42779) (02/20/88)
Are class libraries comparable to the fundamental Smalltalk classes
available for C++ commercially or otherwise? Does anyone envisage
selling class libraries which are well tested and documented (something
like PPI's software IC packages). We are specifically interested in class
libraries for TCP/IP and ISO/OSI process communication and for developing
human interfaces (comparable to Smalltalk's Model-View-Controller).
We are currently considering the use of C++ or Objective-C: the
availability of class libraries and support tools such as an interactive
browser, debugger and change-management system (comparable to Smalltalk)
are an important part of the decision. Are these available or being
developed?
osman khan.
uucp: ...!decwrl!mcvax!philmds!nvpna1!khan
post: Philips Netherlands. Building BC-136A.
Postbox 80000, 5600 MD Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
fax : +31-40-723846
tel : +31-40-723802etxerin@trenter.ericsson.se (Erik Nyquist TX/DHT) (06/05/89)
I am doing an investigation to find out about existing C++-libraries,
in particular those which are at least AT&T version 1.2 -compatible.
If you have done something similar or if you have any experience in
the field I would appreciate a mail from you.
Or you could post a news article if you feel like it.
I am using the Oregon C++-compiler, version 1.2. Also included is a
non-documented guru-version of OOPS, Keith Gorlen's class library.
Does anybody know how to get the OOPS reference manual? !!!!!!!
Has anyone tried to use any other existing class library than OOPS with this compiler?
What experiences do you have?
I also wonder if the Oregon-way to include existing C-libraries is
AT&T, version 1.2-standard?
It's done like this:
extern "C" {
int close( int fd );
// ... Other functiondeclarations with prototype.
}
I think that a big problem with C++, is the non-existence of a standard classlibrary
for collection-classes and other basic things. One reason could be the
fact that these basic collection classes could be implemented either the
"Smalltalk"-way (see OOPS) with a common baseclass Object or the
"ADA"-way (see GNU C++-library) with "generic" classes. Which way is the best?
Should a future standard library provide both ways?
============================================================================
Erik Nyquist, TN/ETX/TX/DHT Mail: etxerin@tore.ericsson.se
Ericsson Telecom
126 25 Stockholm
TEL: +46 - 8 - 719 96 03
============================================================================