AWARE SYSTEMS
TIFF and LibTiff Mail List Archive

Thread

1994.10.21 15:50 "Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by Ben Griffin
1994.10.21 03:20 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by Richard Minner
1994.10.21 05:53 "Re: C++ tiff library", by Richard Minner
1994.10.21 23:15 "Re: C++ tiff library", by Yip Chi Lap
1994.10.21 14:38 "Re: C++ tiff library", by Richard Minner
1994.10.25 20:49 "Re: C++ tiff library", by John M Davison
1994.10.31 04:52 "Re: C++ tiff library", by Richard Minner
1994.10.21 17:12 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by Dan McCoy
1994.10.21 18:36 "C++ tiff library", by Jim Arnold
1994.10.21 18:53 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by John Bradley
1994.10.21 19:16 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by Sam Leffler
1994.10.21 19:13 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by Sam Leffler

1994.10.21 18:53 "Re: Problems catching write errors in tiff library (v3.3beta021)", by John Bradley

On another subject, there was some talk earlier about rewriting the tiff library in C++. Any progress on this? Want any help?

This is a REALLY bad idea in my opinion. It works fine now in C. What is wrong now that a C++ library will fix?

I have lot's of existing code to support that is all in C and uses the TIFF library. I do not want to be forced into a whole new set of tools on the eight different platforms I have to support.

If you want to write tools in C++ that layer on top of a C library, fine. If you want to write a C++ class library that provides an object oriented interface to the library, fine. But save me a lot of heartburn and leave the basic library in C.

Hear hear! For what it's worth, it'll be a cold day in hell before XV uses any C++ code, libraries, or what have you. Not because I have a religious objection to C++, but simply because:

  1. there's no overriding reason to *do* it. Yes, perhaps it would be neat, and perhaps if one were to start from scratch today, you'd write in C++, but it's already in C, and it works, so why break it.
  2. portability. *Everybody* has a C compiler (yeah, I know about Solaris...) and generally every computer installation has, or can find, someone who can understand and fix C programs that don't want to compile. This cannot be said for C++, not even a bit. Also, I'd say most folks out there do not have a C++ compiler. Maybe they could get g++, but then again, maybe they can't. A large number (possibly the majority) of the folks I deal with compile XV with the vendor-supplied C compiler, not gcc. Asking folks to try to install gcc, g++, libg++, and whatever else they might need (a *non-trivial* exercise, even if you know what you're doing), is an awful lot to ask, just to compile a file i/o library, (or even a marginally-spiffy image viewer :-).

--John Bradley