RE: [gtk-list] nonwrapper C++ bindings for GTK (just an idea and a script)

["Arjan J. Molenaar" <A J Molenaar xirion nl>]

Doesn't Sugar basically do the same?

Havoc, where's the reference?

Regards,

Arjan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Guido Draheim [mailto:guidod@gmx.de]
> Sent: dinsdag 18 april 2000 21:12
> To: gtk-list@redhat.com
> Subject: [gtk-list] nonwrapper C++ bindings for GTK (just an 
> idea and a
> script)
> 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> I have made a small perl skript that makes my life with GTK+ 
> much easier
> and so I thought to share it with you. Basically it takes the general
> GTK+ headers and adds a few C++ lines (all ifdef'ed 
> __cplusplus of course).
> After the script is run these header files can be both used from C and
> C++ code.
> 
> The additions are just some C++ inline-methods inside the struct
> declarations, and the use of the C++ inclusion/inheritance syntax
> at the struct start for the base type of each of the structures 
> (again #ifdef __cplusplus of course). 
> 
> As a result, the enhenced (GTK) headers are much more easier 
> to use from C++.
> For the one thing, a C++ compiler does know now about the inheritance 
> relations  for the structures, so you can leave off the 
> ubiquitous big-caps 
> cast-macros - instead you will benefit from compile-time 
> type-checking as is 
> builtin each C++ compiler. 
> 
> For the other thing, you can use the (GTK) procedures as 
> inlined methods 
> along the defined objects. Your code will become much shorter 
> - and in 
> consequence more readable and maintainable. And you don't 
> have to think 
> about which base-type had been introducing the 
> set_border_width method - 
> you can just call the method of that object instance (or their
> class-scope static-declared counterpart that is also generated). 
> 
> Unlike real C++ wrappers, like GTK--, the object size will 
> not increase 
> by a single byte. No additional library needs to be linked 
> in, so even the
> runtime footprint is the same. And if you don't have a C++ compiler 
> at hand (huh?), you can start rewriting the C++ code in an 
> incremental 
> way because the methods are directly derived from their 
> underlying C-language
> procedure names. Since the very same headers can be used with 
> a C compiler 
> you will end up at just changing the file extension and it 
> will compile cleanly. 
> 
> If you want to add some functionality you can always switch 
> into to C++ mode, 
> make a RAD implementation, and if you're done you can rewrite 
> it back into 
> plain C. Nothing could be easier. It does help me a lot in my 
> smallish GTK 
> developments - and I don't need a real wrapper bloatware for it (as is
> some C++/GTK-wrapper or even Perl/GTK). 
> 
> I don't know if the idea may have come up earlier, I checked 
> the mailing list
> archive (about 6 months or so), and I didn't find anything 
> like this. I have
> made similar stuff even years back but interestingly enough I 
> could not find 
> sth. similar at freshmeat, so I thought to wrap it up as a 
> tarball and make 
> up a website.
> 
> You can get a few more details (and the script of course) from
> http://sourceware.de/cc-headers
> 
> have fun
> -- guido
> mailto:guidod@gmx.de                        "Edel sei der Mensch,
> gsm:+49 177 5928220                          hilfreich und 
> gut" -Goethe
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe 
> gtk-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
>