Re: Converting xconq to C++

["Erik Jessen" <ejessen at adelphia dot net>]

I strongly support converting to OO in general, because it will
a) flush out bugs (in my experience, C ->C++ has caught *lots*)
b) OO code is easier for novices to the system to modify
c) OO code is often easier to read, because data and code are localized

I prefer C++ simply because it's widely available, and it will be the
easiest
port to make, and it's what everyone already knows.  Ada, etc. are "cooler"
languages, but I don't want to make people have to spend 6 months and
several hundred dollars on books, just so they can do something with Xconq.
We need a lower barrier to entry, not higher.

I also agree with the strategy below: modify block by block so that the
code runs in both C and C++.  Let it alone for a while, so people can
find any bugs resulting from the translation.  Then start adding objects
as appropriate.

I have to work for a living, but I do have MS C++, for purposes of checking
compatibility with that tool.

Erik

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ed ." <epo001@hotmail.com>
To: <xconq7@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 3:43 AM
Subject: Converting xconq to C++


> Hello everyone,
>
> I started an identical thread a while back and it came to no sensible
> conclusion. Here it is again, I find myself with time on my hands having
got
> laid off recently. I'm looking to refresh my C++ and it seems that
> converting xconq to C++ would be an ideal project.
>
> Equally ideal would be to have the conversion adopted by the main xconq
> gurus (Stan, Hans and Jim). So a first question is this: is there interest
> in having xconq ported to c++ (I'd using gcc3 under redhat 7.2). If so I
> could liase offline with the principals to resolve design issues.
>
> The code seems pretty well structured so the conversion should be
reasonably
> straight forward.
>
> The rough plan is as follows:
>
> Using mixed C/C++ programming techniques incrementally convert the C
sources
> to C++, testing as we go until a literal C++ translation of the C sources
is
> attained making explicit any object-ness of the present code. The
intention
> is to translate code not design, hence many fine details may need
> refinement.
>
> Release this to the developers when it is suitable for group evolution.
>
> Use this as a code base to improve the translation object-by-object until
> the codebase becomes fully object oriented.
>
> Obviously details need to be sorted.
>
> Now I am happy to embark on this, the issue is whether anyone else is
> interested in the outcome, if so there needs to be some liasion to ensure
> changes made the  existing code are reflected in the translation.
>
> Please reply to the list for now and I will follow up.
>
> Thoughts, suggestions?
>
> Ed
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>