Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

**Ben Pfaff** · Nov 4 '08, 04:05 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

"Tony" <tony@my.netwri tes:

Seems unlikely. C++, Objective C, Java, and C# exist already,
and they have the market covered pretty well.
--
"I hope, some day, to learn to read.
It seems to be even harder than writing."
--Richard Heathfield

**George** · Nov 4 '08, 05:25 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:01:24 -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote:

"Tony" <tony@my.netwri tes:
>

>Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

>
Seems unlikely. C++, Objective C, Java, and C# exist already,
and they have the market covered pretty well.

OO would be an uglification for C. It has been for fortran.
--
George

America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear
evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that
could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
George W. Bush

Picture of the Day http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/

**James Dow Allen** · Nov 4 '08, 07:05 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

On Nov 4, 10:57 am, "Tony" <t...@my.netwro te:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

?!?!?!?! :-) :-) ... :-(

APL is a better language than Forth; why not make
Forth more APL-like? Oh, and please rewrite the
shell I use to employ a video game-like interface.

When a blind-tasting test found that 51% of
consumers preferred Pepsi, Coke took its product
off the shelves, replacing it with a Pepsi
taste-alike named "Coke"! (Admittedly this bizarre
ploy turned into a money-winner for Coke when
it reintroduced Classic Coke a little later!)

Call me an old fogey, but I found it simplest
to simply copy old 'nvi' and 'csh' binaries when
I bought a new computer recently. Sounds like
I'd better keep a Classic-C Compiler binary
around also. 1/2 :-)

James Dow Allen

**pete** · Nov 4 '08, 08:55 AM

[ot]Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

James Dow Allen wrote:

When a blind-tasting test found that 51% of
consumers preferred Pepsi, Coke took its product
off the shelves, replacing it with a Pepsi
taste-alike named "Coke"! (Admittedly this bizarre
ploy turned into a money-winner for Coke when
it reintroduced Classic Coke a little later!)

Close, but no.

New Coke - Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke

--
pete

**Wolfgang Draxinger** · Nov 4 '08, 09:35 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Tony wrote:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Nothing prevents you to do OOP with C. OOP is not bound to
languages. For a excellent OOP library for C have a look at
GObject:

404 Not Found

http://library.gnome.org/devel/gobject/stable/

Wolfgang Draxinger
--
E-Mail address works, Jabber: hexarith@jabber .org, ICQ: 134682867

**James Kuyper** · Nov 4 '08, 11:15 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Tony wrote:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

You can already do OO in C; it's just that some other languages have
features that make OO easier than it is in C. If you want a C-like
language with features that support OO, there's several to choose from,
as you almost certainly are already aware of. If there's any point at
all in the continued existence of C after the creation of perl, C++, and
java, it must be to take advantage of the greater simplicity of a
language that does not support OO. That simplicity makes the language
easier to learn, easier to understand, and easier to implement.

OO has it's advantages, too. That's why there's more than one
programming language in the world - different languages are better for
different types of tasks, no one language is best for all tasks.

**Lorenzo Villari** · Nov 4 '08, 01:45 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

"Tony" <tony@my.neth a scritto nel messaggio
news:7LPPk.7145 $Ws1.2454@nlpi0 64.nbdc.sbc.com ...

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?
>
Tony

No, because no C programmer agree on a "single" way to do it in C. For
example Gtk+ has an oop-like system with GObject, but somebody could not
like all that macros and casts under the hood and all the typedefs (example:
gchar for char). So what one do? You create your own sort of oop in C of
course, as a mixture of what you've got already or completely from scratch.
I prefer the second option but you cannot always do that...

**Walter Banks** · Nov 4 '08, 03:45 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Probably not. The primary mandate for WG-14 is to
document current practice. Most OO proposals would
shift the focus of the purpose of C. As other have said
there are many OO languages rooted in C.

w..

Tony wrote:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?
>
Tony

**Eric Sosman** · Nov 4 '08, 03:55 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Tony wrote:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Will the Elgin Marbles ever return to Greece?

--
Eric.Sosman@sun .com

**CBFalconer** · Nov 4 '08, 10:55 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Ben Pfaff wrote:

"Tony" <tony@my.netwri tes:
>

>Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

>
Seems unlikely. C++, Objective C, Java, and C# exist already,
and they have the market covered pretty well.

Besides, it already exists. It just isn't as simple to use, and
requires (horrors) discipline. For example:

typedef struct thing {
readfn readop;
wrtfn writeop;
size_t gutsize;
char guts[MAXGUTS]
} thing, *thingp;

with readfn and wrtfn pointers to procedures, can be used to
implement many of the types of operations used in OO. Then
"thing.read op" might require coding:

if (err = *thingp.readop( *thing, stdin, 100))
handlerr(err, *thing);

and I don't use this, so ignore any silly errors above.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home .att.net>
Try the download section.

**S M Ryan** · Nov 5 '08, 03:25 AM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

In article <7LPPk.7145$Ws1 .2454@nlpi064.n bdc.sbc.com>, "Tony" <tony@my.net>
wrote:

Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?
>
Tony

Yes. It's called Objective-C.

--
I'm not even supposed to be here today.

I ASSURE YOU WE'RE OPEN!

**Pawel Dziepak** · Nov 5 '08, 01:15 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

S M Ryan wrote:

Yes. It's called Objective-C.

Objective-C extensions are no covered by any C standard. It's just
another programming language that is based on C.

Pawel Dziepak
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkk RnA4ACgkQPFW+cU iIHNq4IgCfQs2e7 gjdcVQlg7gVNJVd EFtR
UpAAoJDhBDgbChA bpqwgvkx7DxKTwM ZF
=45bY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

**Lorenzo Villari** · Nov 5 '08, 01:35 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

"Pawel Dziepak" <pdziepak@quarn os.orgha scritto nel messaggio
news:ges66e$grk $1@registered.m otzarella.org.. .

>
Objective-C extensions are no covered by any C standard. It's just
another programming language that is based on C.

Yes and the syntax is quite different (and horrible in my view)...

**CBFalconer** · Nov 5 '08, 04:15 PM

Re: Will C ever have OO (any) as part of the std?

Pawel Dziepak wrote:

>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
>

.... snip ...

>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
iEYEARECAAYFAkk RnA4ACgkQPFW+cU iIHNq4IgCfQs2e7 gjdcVQlg7gVNJVd EFtR
UpAAoJDhBDgbChA bpqwgvkx7DxKTwM ZF
=45bY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Please eliminate this useless gup.

I'll revise that - it has a purpose - to annoy.

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home .att.net>
Try the download section.