dotc integration? about cute_headers HOT 8 CLOSED

without modifying anything else about the c language
Apart from the part where it compiles all your C as C++ as it depends on namespaces.

This is the wrong place for me to have this argument, but it annoys me when blatant untruths are propagated in an attempt to get adoption. C isn't a subset of C++, and most likely never will be.

from cute_headers.

I hope you don't also think that my ask for a PR is any attempt to intentionally lie or push an agenda.

Sorry, I didn't mean to accuse you of any of that. What I meant is that the dotc developers are either unaware that their project does not work with C (which doesn't instil confidence in the quality of their library), or that they are deliberately trying to mislead people by proclaiming C support all over their webpage. I suspect it's the former, since they do mention lower down on the page that "When somebody writes a namespace transform we can drop the forced c++ upgrade.".

from cute_headers.

blatant untruths are propagated in an attempt to get adoption.

If you look at my background, you'll see I have a much stronger experience skill set with web stuff. I'm still new to c. I wasn't aware that dotc is turning all of the source into c++.

I'm not telling an untruth or cheerleading anything purposefully to get adoption. It's not even my project. Coming from other languages that have proper modularity, this seems like a way to do sane c-style programming without polluting the global namespace.

from cute_headers.

I agree with @zao's reaction in principle, but in this case the fact that dotc only supports C++ code is a moot point, because tinyheaders is already written to compile as either C or C++. It also looks as though all code changes are hidden behind #ifdef DOTC, so it won't break compatibility.

from cute_headers.

I agree with @zao's reaction in principle

I hope you don't also think that my ask for a PR is any attempt to intentionally lie or push an agenda. I really just proposed this as a way to enable what seems to be a neat way to namespace code.

It also looks as though all code changes are hidden behind #ifdef DOTC,
so it won't break compatibility.

Yeah. Obviously dotc is not a common/popular approach for most tinyheaders users. It's a tradeoff between polluting the code with a 40 line #ifdef and enabling people that would like to use this with dotc. Though this #ifdef could also double as a way to document the "public" API that tiny2c exposes which is already alluded to here: https://github.com/RandyGaul/tinyheaders/blob/master/tinyc2.h#L37-L56

from cute_headers.

Hey there, thanks for the dotc idea. I hadn't ever heard of it before.

node's module lookup algorithm

I actually have no idea what this is, but I did peek at the page. Require/export aren't apart of C, and unfortunately I would not want to clutter the header any more than needs be. The header portion of tinyc2 is the most important part of the entire file, so cluttering it should be avoided at all costs.

Anyways, thanks for the idea!

from cute_headers.

Sorry for the kneejerk reaction, just a bit worn out by these kinds of requests across the projects I watch.

from cute_headers.

Sorry

Thanks, I appreciate that! 👍

a bit worn out by these kinds of requests across the projects I watch

I hear ya. :)

from cute_headers.