[LAD] Looking for an introduction to rt programming with a gui

[torbenh]

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:24:17AM +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:58 AM, torbenh <torbenh at gmx.de> wrote:
> > well... for me, saying c++, is saying boost. boost and modern c++ is what
> > makes c++ better than java.
> > java is a pretty great language nowadays (with generics and annotators
> > and stuff). my big problem with java is that its stdlib is really a big mess.
> 
> I always thought the big chunk of new stuff added in Java 1.5 was a
> really bad idea.  That took a compact, comprehensible language that
> lacked a number of convenient features but at least had a single
> "school of practice", and gave it the capacity for the same sort of
> fragmentation as you have in C++.  But I haven't done Java development
> in earnest since that stuff became widespread, so I don't know whether
> that's really happened in practice.

i dont know which features you mean.
but not having typesafe containers like pre generics, puts the language
on par with python for me. (except that in python i dont need to cast
everything to the correct type after pulling it out of a container :S

> Reading a language is (for most projects) more important than writing
> it.  You yourself took the jackdmp code (in C++) and ported it back to
> good old C because it was written "from the wrong school of C++" and
> you found C easier to work with.  Jackdmp is not exactly weird code --
> it's written rather like pre-1.5 Java -- but its C++ is just not the
> same C++ as you use.  Similarly, for someone like me who has used Qt
> for many years, Boost has always seemed largely superfluous and the
> language that for you "is C++" is for me something a little bit alien.

the language i am referring too is termed "modern c++"
also i didnt port the jackdmp code.
tschack is pretty different from jack2.


i also only used boost because these parts of boost are going to show up
in the STL. 

modern c++ heavily leverages templates and they were anticipating
concepts to show up in c++0x which would have improved the error
messages associated with template code. 

we wont have concepts. thats a bit sad. but this doesnt stop people
from writing code in a concept oriented way.

>  Is it possible to write C++ in such a way that every competent C++
> developer is happy to work with the results without some sort of
> re-education?

classic C++ and "modern c++" are two pairs of shoes.
if your afraid of writing templates. modern c++ is not for you.
for me templates are an integral part of c++. but i am also pretty
annoyed if i read the compiler output asm and directly see somthing i
could do better when i wrote the asm myself.

i only do that for inner loops. but i also stop the heavy templating at
some point and just write rather classic gui code then, or just wrap the
whole bunch into a python extension.


-- 
torben Hohn