Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ubvax!vsi1!daver!athsys!stergios From: stergios@athsys.uucp (Stergios Marinopoulos) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: C++ Summary: Maybe I'll get an answer this time. Message-ID: <146@cyclopes.UUCP> Date: 18 Jun 88 02:14:37 GMT References: <29559@cca.CCA.COM> Reply-To: stergios@cyclopes.UUCP (Stergios Marinopoulos) Organization: XPert XPorts Lines: 84 In article <29559@cca.CCA.COM> jack@cca.CCA.COM (Jack Orenstein) writes: > I know this has been discussed, but I didn't need the information at the time. > > Is there a C++ compiler or preprocessor for the Amiga? Who produces it > and how much does it cost? I'd actually prefer a preprocessor so that I > can look at the generated C code to understand some of the C++ semantics, > and to have access to Manx SDB. > > Jack Orenstein > > > This is not a disclaimer. Yes, there was a little discussion on C++ before. It is a translator. But dont get your hopes up because of "this" (pun intended). A few concerns which I have voiced previously regarding C++ translators are included below. I never received any feedback on them before so here they are again. Well, actually thats not entirely true. I have received some feedback from a "Language" company about my comments. To bad they dont write compilers for the amiga. Its kinda funny that one heck of a potential competitor for lattice thought it important enough to write back regarding a letter not even directly addressed to them. When will the amiga market mature??? // C++ issues. I beleive mwm@violet.berkeley.edu has already mentioned that Lattice's C++ will be a translator and not a compiler. What I would like to know is if Lattice is basing this translator on AT&T's, *much* like the designer C++ Programming System from Glockenspiel Ltd., Dublin Ireland. Then if so could someone in the know address the following issues? * how does Lattice solve the "post linker linker" problem? - does it go into the executable and patch it with a linked list of all static objects and execute them before entering main?. * related to the above: If you do peform this ugly hack are you going to get it right or mess it up (like AT&T and therefore glockenspiel did) so bad that static global objects cannot be depended on! * again related to the above: will lattice *GUARANTEE* only *ONE* vtable per class per executable? If not then just throw out the possibility of having large programs developed. You would be supprised how easy it is for executables to grow over 1 meg without this option! * again related to the above: What about virtual destructors? Are you going to get them right? Please, please say yes. * what extensions will lattice support? - multiple inheritance? can live with out but would be a big win for true object oriented programming. - accept "old style" c function definitions? *this is a must* - interface to "old style" c libraries. * document the naming convention for overloaded and virtual functions. This is a must for debugging. Not that AT&T documented it. It would just be nice to have in a product you pay $$ for and make your living with! * How about debugging? Are you going to support a C++ debuugger? I could live with a regular dbx style debugger that has alias commands. Dont even bother giving a machine level debugger by itself. Could a Lattice representative please comment on the above? stergios marinopoulos XPert XPorts sun!athsys!cyclopes!stergios