Chris Cannam wrote:
  On Wednesday 26 Jul 2006 11:12, Florian Paul Schmidt
wrote:
  Well, it is very thin though. Which is not a bad
thing at all. One could
 make ue of an arbitrary amount of more advanced C++ features if desired
 though (i.e. templates parametrized with the type you want to read for
 example, or operator<< and operator>> for reading and writing, etc.) 
 operator<< and >>... ugh. 
Yeah I really gotta agree here. Overloading the left and right
shift operators has got to the thing I find most distasteful
about C++.
  I think if your class is named LikeThis, then your
method should be named
 likeThat (Java-style).  If your method is named like_this, then your class
 should be named like_that (STL-style).  Either is fine, but don't mix your
 dialects. 
Ok, "don't mix dialects" is a good tip. Most of the proposed methods
for the Sndfile class have single word names so Java style might be
the best option.
  Mmm.  For what it's worth, I write mostly C++ but
have no problem
 with using the libsndfile C API. 
Most people who really know C++ know enough to be comfortable
with pure C. I'm pretty sure you fall into this category.
However, I do get emails from some of the more clueless Windiots
complaining that libsndfile is written in old-fashioned C instead
of nice shiny modern C++. IMNSHO these people should not be allowed
anywhere near a language as complex, subtle, and unforgiving as
C++ (or for that matter as unforgiving as C).
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"I consider C++ the most significant technical hazard to the survival
of your project and do so without apologies." -- Alistair Cockburn