3 ms·
I remember that Symbian C++ just like QT back in the day barely looked like C++ with all annotations and macros. You basically had to learn a new very ugly lang
by danielscrubs 6y ago
I remember that Symbian C++ just like QT back in the day barely looked like C++ with all annotations and macros. You basically had to learn a new very ugly language for no good reason. Also it seemed that there was no way to earn money on apps as the friction to buy apps where too big.
- usr1106 6y ago> You basically had to learn a new very ugly language for no good reason. Agree with the ugly. Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some say it was an engineering master piece of the 1990s. But it was different from everything else and it was difficult, I don't think this can be disputed. The no good reason is not the whole truth: * When Symbian (then called EPOC32) was developed there was no C++ compiler that supported exceptions without major problems. "Don't use them" was typical in style guides at the time. So EPOC came up with their own macro hackeries instead, which worked when used correctly. The latter was too difficult for many developers. * Early devices had just single digits of megabytes of RAM. So 500 times less than a phone of today. More macro trickeries to save Bytes were the answer.
- danielscrubs 6y agoI’ll give you that the c++ exceptions had some issues if you agree that they should have removed the macro hackeries as soon as c++ exceptions was the norm. QT also had their own signal implementation with macro hacks way longer than necessary (maybe still do?)