Re: Extension Language for a Text Editor

Frank Schmitt <[e-mail]> skrev i en
nyhedsmeddelelse:4cfzi2lod6.fsf@scxw21.4sc...
> Simon Strandgaard <[e-mail]> 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:

I know.. cloning in C++ get tiresome at that point when you have
many childred.

> class Base {
>   virtual Base* clone() = 0;
> };
>
> class Derived1: public Base {
>   virtual Base* clone() { return new Derived1(*this); }
> };

This method requires typecasting if you want to do something like this:

Derived *a = new Derived1();
Derived *b = dynamic_cast<Derived*>(a->clone());


Covariant return types is unfortunatly a relative new thing in the C++
world.

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

Derived *a = new Derived1();
Derived *b = a->clone();


> > 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 :-)

Compiling is expensive on my Pentium350 which is the fastest machine I have.
GCC2.96 was quite fast...  I have not yet seen any fast result with GCC3.
I like templates, I like many things in C++. If I had a faster machine, then
there would be no problems :-)

--
Simon Strandgaard