Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > When will C have an object model?

Reply
Thread Tools

When will C have an object model?

 
 
Tech07
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
When will C have an object model?


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Thomas Matthews
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
Tech07 wrote:
> When will C have an object model?
>
>

Please explain your definition of "object model"
and how you think it will pertain to the
C language.

--
Thomas Matthews

C++ newsgroup welcome message:
http://www.slack.net/~shiva/welcome.txt
C++ Faq: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite
C Faq: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/c-faq/top.html
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++ faq:
http://www.comeaucomputing.com/learn/faq/
Other sites:
http://www.josuttis.com -- C++ STL Library book
http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl -- Standard Template Library
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Kaz Kylheku
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
On 2009-09-06, Tech07 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> When will C have an object model?


C isn't an extensible programming language. So adding an object system to C
means that a new language is created (possibly one which has significant
backward compatibility).

This has already happened, quite long ago, and the results were given names
like C++ and Objective C.
 
Reply With Quote
 
ld
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
On 6 sep, 06:40, Kaz Kylheku <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 2009-09-06, Tech07 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > When will C have an object model?

>
> C isn't an extensible programming language.


You could be interested by

http://cos.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewv...raft-dls09.pdf

to see how C itself is extensible and can do better than Objective-C.
The C Object System is a C library which adds a rather complete object
model to C (like CLOS to Common Lisp) and allows to build component
(reusable generic object) that you can't built in C++ or Objective-C.

One great thing with C is that it _hasn't_ an object model and
therefore you can have your own. C is just missing two _syntactic_
extension to emulate subtyping and overloading (backward compatible)
and be qualified as an OO language.

cheers,

ld.
 
Reply With Quote
 
phil-news-nospam@ipal.net
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 21:59:45 -0500 Tech07 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

| When will C have an object model?

It doesn't need one. Applications may need one, but languages don't.
If you application needs one, choose a language that has one.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/ http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Draxinger
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 21:59:45 -0500 Tech07 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> | When will C have an object model?
>
> It doesn't need one. Applications may need one, but languages don't.
> If you application needs one, choose a language that has one.


And even then you can choose any language you like. You'll just have a
little more work to do, implementing all the object system's backend stuff.

Or use a ready to use object system. For C there is GObject. (Please no
debates, GObject works and does it's job very well. In my experience GNOME
is a lot more stable than KDE, and I'm saying this as a mainly-KDE user).


Wolfgang

 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
On Sep 6, 3:59*am, "Tech07" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> When will C have an object model?


Is this zero-terminated, or counted objects?

--
Bartc
 
Reply With Quote
 
Eric Sosman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
Tech07 wrote:
> When will C have an object model?


When the National Hockey League schedules games in Hell.

--
Eric Sosman
(E-Mail Removed)lid
 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
....
>Opinion is moving against object-oriented programming.


Is it? I want to make it clear that I have no opinion on the subject,
nor any stake in the outcome. I am just curious.

But I will say this: The statement above looks like a political
statement - like you generally see in the political/religious (Yes, at
least in America, they are one in the same) groups. I.e., a "He said,
she said" situation. For example, you often see this (in fact, this and
variations of it are about all you do see in the political/religious
groups):

A: The Republican party is dead (marginalized, of no consequence).
Note that its standards bearer these days is Sarah Palin (snicker, snicker)

B: (No it's not) Surveys show that Americans are becoming more
conservative (pro-life, etc, etc)

So, what makes you think it (programming) is moving against OO?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-06-2009
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Malcolm McLean <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
....
>Stuff I've read. You used to read plenty of articles attacking C++, but not
>object-oritented programming itself. Now I've notice far more material
>attacking the very concept of object oriented programming.
>
>Dijkstra said "Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea
>which could only have originated in California"
>
>The Wikipedia entry on "object-oriented programming" has a list of critics.
>
>I'd admit this isn't a very scientific survey, more an impression about they
>way the wind is blowing.


OK. What do you think is going to be "the next big thing"?

BTW, the way these things go is that by the time business/industry has
firmly adopted something, that's the clue that it is time for the
academics and other smart people to disparage it and move on to "the
next big thing." I.e., down in the trenches (business and industry)
they seem to like OO just fine.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OOP, object literal notation, and the 'new' operator - how to have multiple child objects of a parent object? iporter Javascript 4 10-19-2007 07:20 AM
Do I have to have the WEP # set for file sharing? =?Utf-8?B?SGVscCBtZSBJIGNhbicndCBzaGFyZSE=?= Wireless Networking 3 11-01-2005 05:37 AM
Object creation - Do we really need to create a parent for a derieved object - can't the base object just point to an already created base object jon wayne C++ 9 09-22-2005 02:06 AM
have you got any of these i can have spike240 Case Modding 4 09-14-2005 03:48 AM
do i have to have.... =?Utf-8?B?amFrZQ==?= Wireless Networking 1 03-11-2005 06:05 PM



Advertisments