Re: implementation language [was: library for unicode collation in C for texi2any?]

[Per Bothner]

On 10/16/23 05:36, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 12:00:51PM -0700, Per Bothner wrote:
> > I'm far from a C++ expert these days, but some ideas:
> >
> > * First of course you can define some helper methods:
> >
> > class TargetElement {
> >    Extra *extra;
> >    Command *unit_command() { return extra ? extra->init_command() : nullptr; }
> > }
>
> I don't think you can implement this language feature with helper
> methods, at least not like this.  Consider the chain of access
> a->maybe_b()->maybe_c()->d().  If maybe_b() returns null then the ->maybe_c()
> call will be an error
I just meant for the more common cases it might be reasonable to add
some helper methods. It's a case-by-case approach, not a general one.

For example if a->maybe_b()->maybe_c()->d() occurs multiple times
it might make sense to add a maybe_d method to A's class.

> It's still more verbose.
> ...
> This would require a lot of extra class definitions and doesn't seem that
> easy to read.

Regardless, C++ has more tools than C does to deal with with these issues.
Which is my point: if you're using C, you might as well use a C++ compiler.
Then you can decide which C++ features to use, as you go along.
No need to aim for full-blown idiomatic C++. C with some C++ features is OK too.
--
        --Per Bothner
per@bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/