Re: [Vala] Complex number support?

[Anatol Pomozov <anatol pomozov gmail com>]

Hi

2010/12/13 pancake <pancake youterm com>:
> On 12/13/10 19:30, Aleksander Wabik wrote:
> > > -1 portability is VERY important if we want to use vala outside
> > > gnu/linux.
> >
> > I understand your point of view (the whole idea of sticking to
> > glib as a layer between vala and everything else is good). I'd then
> > propose to create c99 bindings: c99.vapi or something. It would not be
> > portable, just as such apis like posix aren't. Complex numbers would
> > not be part of vala language. But you would not have to use mpfr to get
> > the functionality that is available at the language level for 10 years.
> >
> > On the other hand, again: I personally think that the whole idea of
> > sticking to glib as a layer between vala and everything else is good;
> > the idea of maintaining glib compatibility with 20-years old tools is
> > awful (well, that should go to the glib list). Compatibility?
> >
> > icc: supports c99
> > rvct: yes, but without complex numbers (in version 3, I don't know what
> > about 4, but I hope that this will be implemented)
> > openwatcom: work in progress
> >
> > I don't want to start a flamewar here, but if by "portability" you mean
> > "compiling with microsoft compiler", I can not agree with this. From my
> > point of view, you just can not create a good, modern product using
> > non-modern tools. Not to mention that microsoft support for C language
> > is... unclear. I did not touch visual studio for a year, but in the
> > last version that I've seen there were no C compiler at all, only C++.
> >
> > Well, these were my 2 pennies.
> >
> > best regards,
> I don't like visual studio, but is what you get if you work for a company
> that wants their product on windows.

You can compile C99 code on windows, you just need to use compiler
that supports this language standard (e.g. gcc). It is what other
projects recommend http://www.ffmpeg.org/faq.html#SEC34

But even with MinGW/gcc there are some limitation http://www.mingw.org/wiki/C99

> Actually all vala code compiles
> in clang, gcc, msvc, tcc, icc and forte. which is pretty good.
>
> I know that VisualStudio C compiler is pretty broken, but I would like
> to have Vala fit with the same C standard as GLIB does. Just for
> coherence.
>
> The features c99 adds to the language are not really useful and most
> of them (apart complex numbers) can be handled by the vala compiler
> (defining vars in the middle of the code, switch cases with ranges, ..)
>
> I have never need to use complex numbers.. so i dont see it as an
> important feature.
>
> But I understand that if you do stuff with maths you need complex, rational
> and big numbers .. and having the language support this can hardly
> benefit the development of apps in Vala for such tasks.
>
> What i'm proposing is just simpler. It keeps compatiblity with compiler and
> allows to use different backends to implement such kind of types. But
> requires
> to add support for operator overloading in vapis, which requires some
> discussion (as I already talk about this a year ago with Jürg).
>
> The use of complex numbers can be defined in a vapi file which make it use
> the C99-gcc magic you like, but it will also support other kind of backends,
> like native one or based on OpenSSL, GMP or MPFR.
>
> --pancake
> _______________________________________________
> vala-list mailing list
> vala-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list