From: Frank Schmitt <invalid@...>
Date: 2003-10-09T19:12:24+09:00
Subject: Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor

Simon Strandgaard <qj5nd7l02@sneakemail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 06:06:32 +0900, Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> > * What would be easier to do using Ruby?
> 
> undo/redo/macros.. The code which is responsible for this only takes up
> 119 lines of Ruby code.  This is more complex in C++ because you cannot 
> #clone arbitrary objects.

If you are talking about user-defined class hierarchies, you *can* clone
them, as well - it just requires extra work:

class Base {
  virtual Base* clone() = 0;
};

class Derived1: public Base {
  virtual Base* clone() { return new Derived1(*this); }
};

class Derived2: public Base {
  virtual Base* clone() { return new Derived2(*this); }
};
 
> unittesting:  AEditor has about 440 testcases and 1400 assertions.
> unittesting is annoying in C++.  In Ruby its easy.

Why is unittesting in C++ annoying? I have an application with 200+
testcases and 400+ assertions, written completely in C++.
The only thing that annoys me is that I can't easily add/remove tests
without recompiling - some day I'll have to write a ruby wrapper to do this :-)

kind regards
frank

-- 
Frank Schmitt 
4SC AG		phone: +49 89 700763-0
		e-mail: frankNO DOT SPAMschmitt AT 4sc DOT com