Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!taumet!mike
From: mike@taumet.UUCP (Michael S. Ball)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Do class libraries have to be in source form? (1 of 4)
Keywords: libraries, source, C++
Message-ID: <176@taumet.UUCP>
Date: 20 Nov 89 15:32:31 GMT
Organization: Taumetric Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 33


The final session of the recent "C++ At Work" conference was a panel
of "experts" discussing the future of C++.  Several members of the
panel spoke at considerable length about the future market for object
code versions of C++ object libraries.  They also claimed this was
going to improve productivity enormously.  After listening to it for
quite a while, I got fed up and (loudly) stated that I thought this
was so much garbage.  The experts, of course, all disagreed with me,
but many attendees told me afterward that they agreed strongly.  I
let this sit for a week so my initial strong emotional reaction had
time to die down.  I think there are still several questions worthy
of wider discussion.

1.  Are object-only versions of class libraries a good idea.

2.  Why to vendors of class libraries want to distribute object-only
    versions rather than source code.

3.  Why did I (and others) have such a negative reaction to the
    expert pronouncements.

I am posting three articles on these three topics in hopes of
stimulating further discussion.  To establish my "bona fides", I am
the author of the first C++ frontend implemented outside AT&T, and
have closely studied every scrap of C++ code I have been able to
find.  I have also supervised the development of a class library
(still incomplete) but I have never tried to make heavy use of an
existing class library on a large project.

Michael S. Ball	     		       email: uunet!taumet!mike	
TauMetric Corporation		       Phone: (619)275-6381
1094 Cudahy Pl. Ste 302		       MCI: TauMetric
San Diego, CA 92110