Subject: Re: [boost] The C++ Post-Processor
From: Christian Schladetsch (christian.schladetsch_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-18 09:42:00
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 1:48 AM, Thomas Klimpel <Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden]
> Christian Schladetsch wrote:
> > And, is there any serious effort to make a formal and correct C++
> > interpreter? It can of course be done. I will argue that it has to be
> > sooner than later if C++ is to remain relevant as an actively used (as
> > opposed to necessarily maintained) language going forward.
> There is a famous company:
This company is well known, as are their products. But they can't be used as
C++ or Boost can be used. I am not clear about what standard of C++ Edison
Design use. From their dox it seems quite dated. Personally, I haven't
followed them due to the name (Edison) and their tasteless choice of icon (a
light globe). Teslsa would turn.
> Using their products, you would probably be able to get your interpreter,
> but because it won't be open source, you probably won't be happy. But before
> you claim that they should open source it, consider that their offering can
> be used as an important building block of products that really make money.
Sure, but I am wondering openly about an effort based on Boost.Wave that can
provide a C++ environment created from a C++ environment. Such an effort
could be used to test ideas far better than the current 'standard' 5-20 year
turn-around could. And we shouldn't need to rely on a closed company.
C++ could make C++ quite easily, especially if using a tool like ANTLR. But
whatever the means, it is a sad state that C++ doesn't have a C++
interpreter or a C++ runtime. Perhaps the work done on Boost.Wave could be
used to make it.
Currently, the best way is either with Spirit or ANTLR. I don't care which,
but I do care that C++ is reflected soon. The fear is that C++ will become
the assembler of the future. Let's face it; it has old ideas and old
practices. No amount of cleverness can make it relevant in a cloud
environment, where everything is virtualised.
If it can be isolated via virtualisation, and standardised, then it could
remain, with some pre-processor magic, a common denominator language of good
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk