CompuServe Thread

#CORECOMP-Compilers

3 messages in this thread
#188382From: Bruce . PearsonAug 31, 1995 4:26 PM
Question: Is there some inherent reason why MS/VC++ is the only viable development platform? For example, what about Smalltalk, or Borland's object pascal, Delphi? These object oriented languages are a whole lot easier to deal with. BP PS: About Delphi, I'm not sure, but, of Smalltalk, nearly positive an NT version exists, probably Digitalk.
#188433From: Larry MintonAug 31, 1995 8:51 PM
Here is a previous message from Gus J Grubba: ===== This is a nature of C++. Without going into much explanation, function names in C++ are "mangled" in order to differentiate between similar named functions in different classes. Because these names are exported [by the linker] you must use a same compiler that "mangles" a function name the same way. This is the reason. Unless another compiler mangles the names in the same way VC++ does, you must use it to generate DLL's for MAX. It is possible, however, to write, using VC++, an interface plugin. This would allow anyone to write anything using any language. A direct plug-in for MAX will have to be written using VC++ as they are classes derived from MAX (which was written with VC++). That, in itself, does not mean you couldn't write a plug-in in Algol, provided you also write an interface for it. =====
#188438From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Aug 31, 1995 9:00 PM
Hi Bruce, << Is there some inherent reason why MS/VC++ is the only viable development platform? >> Sure. Please see Gus' description found in msg# 187781. jonas[adesk]