Comments on: 03.02.2008 LibSydney and PulseAudio development http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/ Just another GNOME Blogs weblog Sat, 04 Feb 2012 00:04:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Stefan Westerfeld http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-22 Stefan Westerfeld Sun, 10 Feb 2008 04:42:36 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-22 > Can’t do object orientation in C? Tell that to the people who wrote GObject. I have not said that it is not possible to do object oriented programming in C. I just said that it is suboptimal, because the language does not support it. And I know Tim Janik who wrote lots of GObject code - we have studied at the University of Hamburg together; and we are both working on BEAST. Since we started using C++ in BEAST, we see that the amount of source code you need to write to implement a plugin, a widget or some other part of the program is usually quite a bit smaller than the C code. So I am not saying that you cannot do object orientation in C (GIMP for instance is an excellent object oriented application written in C); my point is only that coding the same functionality in C++ is less work than in doing it in plain C. > Can’t do object orientation in C? Tell that to the people who wrote GObject.

I have not said that it is not possible to do object oriented programming in C. I just said that it is suboptimal, because the language does not support it. And I know Tim Janik who wrote lots of GObject code – we have studied at the University of Hamburg together; and we are both working on BEAST.

Since we started using C++ in BEAST, we see that the amount of source code you need to write to implement a plugin, a widget or some other part of the program is usually quite a bit smaller than the C code. So I am not saying that you cannot do object orientation in C (GIMP for instance is an excellent object oriented application written in C); my point is only that coding the same functionality in C++ is less work than in doing it in plain C.

]]> By: Jens Munk http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-20 Jens Munk Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:34:52 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-20 Ups Never seen this syntax before. Just tested the source using gdb. No memory is allocated twice. Sorry for the inconvenience Jens Ups

Never seen this syntax before. Just tested the source using gdb. No memory is allocated twice.

Sorry for the inconvenience

Jens

]]> By: Jens Munk http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-19 Jens Munk Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:28:25 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-19 Hi Stefan I ran across a FIR filter of yours, where you have made a nice templated class for memory alignment. I have a question for you What is the point in malloc'ing and afterwards new (data + i) T() You allocate memory twice. You can equally well allocate an array of struct/class/unions and use the __atribute(aligned(16)). Cheers Jens Hi Stefan

I ran across a FIR filter of yours, where you have made a nice templated class for memory alignment. I have a question for you

What is the point in

malloc’ing

and afterwards

new (data + i) T()

You allocate memory twice. You can equally well allocate an array of struct/class/unions and use the __atribute(aligned(16)).

Cheers
Jens

]]> By: Me http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-16 Me Mon, 04 Feb 2008 06:58:49 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-16 Can't do object orientation in C? Tell that to the people who wrote GObject. Can’t do object orientation in C? Tell that to the people who wrote GObject.

]]> By: Rui http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-15 Rui Sun, 03 Feb 2008 11:17:06 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-15 It's factually correct that C doesn't support modern OOP. That said, a lot of people (the majority of GNOME) don't mind doing OOP with GObject despite its verbosity. What's your problem with GObject? It’s factually correct that C doesn’t support modern OOP. That said, a lot of people (the majority of GNOME) don’t mind doing OOP with GObject despite its verbosity. What’s your problem with GObject?

]]> By: lurgy http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/comment-page-1/#comment-14 lurgy Sun, 03 Feb 2008 04:47:34 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/stw/2008/02/03/03022008-libsydney-and-pulseaudio-development/#comment-14 But it is certainly possible to use the OO paradigm in C! It is true that C++ was implemented with OO in mind, but that doesn't mean you can't do it in C too :) That is a significant misconception ^_^ But it is certainly possible to use the OO paradigm in C! It is true that C++ was implemented with OO in mind, but that doesn’t mean you can’t do it in C too :)

That is a significant misconception ^_^

]]>