5 ms·

Harfbuzz exposes a C API, why would you need to use C++? Additionally, it works extremely well with GTK 4 via Pango and you can often interoperate between the

Harfbuzz exposes a C API, why would you need to use C++? Additionally, it works extremely well with GTK 4 via Pango and you can often interoperate between the two layers if you even need to touch a hb_face_t/etc. In fact, the only time I had to mess with Harfbuzz was when integrating GPU-rendered glyphs via Behdad's GLyphy shaders.

sylware 4y ago
It has a C API, but it is written using c++. A long time ago, I did a build of GTK3, to remove the c++ dependency, I did an implemention of this C API in C, only for roman scripts though. I bet this C API was "obsolescence planned" and if I ever need GTK again (unlikely), I will code again a C implementation for roman scripts. There is an alternative from IBM, ICU, it was properly coded in C, but it was switched to toxic c++.
- audidude 4y ago
  Sounds like C++ has hurt you quite a bit. I mean, I don't use it, and I've been writing C for a solid 25 years, but Behdad is one of the best engineers I've ever met in my life. So I definitely don't share your opinion of the code or the quality.
  - sylware 4y ago
    c++ is toxic for humanity because of its grotestquely and absurdely complex and massive syntax and its compilers. This is not a matter of opinion, this is an absolute unquestionable truth. Carefull, I am not saying plain and simple C is better: it is only orders of magnitude less worse as there is already way too much in its syntax. Some would call that, the "most reasonable compromise".
    - audidude 4y ago
      Cool story.
      - sylware 4y ago
        The beyond sanity complexity of c++ is not a story unfortunately. The real sad story is that some ppl think they are smart because they code c++.
        d_tr 4y ago
        The really sad story is the unjustified amount of shit C++ gets given its history and design goals. C++ provides features to write much safer and nicer code than with C, for the same effort, with minimal overhead. You have proper constructors and destructors, smart pointers, the STL, templates, and much more. Your comments in this thread make no sense.
        sylware 4y ago
        It is perfectly sensible: c++ syntax and its compilers are grostesquely and absurdely massive and complex, and this is an issue. There is no opinion here, just facts: for instance, due to the abysmaly (the word is fair) difference between c++ and C, it is reasonable for a team of averagely skilled individuals or individuals to write a naive C compiler, which is absolutely not the case for c++. If you don't want to acknowlegde this is a issue, at least I tried to open your eyes on the matter.
    - cowtools 4y ago
      There was article here the other day on a project by herb stutter to improve c++ syntax, I can link it to you if you want. But I get the impression that the syntax is a fixable problem. Usually critics point so something like the template system or something.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      So you also only use C compilers written in C, so no clang nor GCC for you I guess.
      - sylware 4y ago
        Indeed, I am currently trying to remove as much as I can gcc and llvm from my stack (I am now targetting much more, probably too much). llvm is financed by apple (vanguard/blackrock), and gcc by the MIT/redhat(IBM). I wish I had that much money to hire ppl in order to remove that toxic c++.

sylware 4y ago

It has a C API, but it is written using c++. A long time ago, I did a build of GTK3, to remove the c++ dependency, I did an implemention of this C API in C, only for roman scripts though. I bet this C API was "obsolescence planned" and if I ever need GTK again (unlikely), I will code again a C implementation for roman scripts. There is an alternative from IBM, ICU, it was properly coded in C, but it was switched to toxic c++.

audidude 4y ago
Sounds like C++ has hurt you quite a bit. I mean, I don't use it, and I've been writing C for a solid 25 years, but Behdad is one of the best engineers I've ever met in my life. So I definitely don't share your opinion of the code or the quality.
- sylware 4y ago
  c++ is toxic for humanity because of its grotestquely and absurdely complex and massive syntax and its compilers. This is not a matter of opinion, this is an absolute unquestionable truth. Carefull, I am not saying plain and simple C is better: it is only orders of magnitude less worse as there is already way too much in its syntax. Some would call that, the "most reasonable compromise".
  - audidude 4y ago
    Cool story.
    - sylware 4y ago
      The beyond sanity complexity of c++ is not a story unfortunately. The real sad story is that some ppl think they are smart because they code c++.
      - d_tr 4y ago
        The really sad story is the unjustified amount of shit C++ gets given its history and design goals. C++ provides features to write much safer and nicer code than with C, for the same effort, with minimal overhead. You have proper constructors and destructors, smart pointers, the STL, templates, and much more. Your comments in this thread make no sense.
        sylware 4y ago
        It is perfectly sensible: c++ syntax and its compilers are grostesquely and absurdely massive and complex, and this is an issue. There is no opinion here, just facts: for instance, due to the abysmaly (the word is fair) difference between c++ and C, it is reasonable for a team of averagely skilled individuals or individuals to write a naive C compiler, which is absolutely not the case for c++. If you don't want to acknowlegde this is a issue, at least I tried to open your eyes on the matter.
  - cowtools 4y ago
    There was article here the other day on a project by herb stutter to improve c++ syntax, I can link it to you if you want. But I get the impression that the syntax is a fixable problem. Usually critics point so something like the template system or something.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    So you also only use C compilers written in C, so no clang nor GCC for you I guess.
    - sylware 4y ago
      Indeed, I am currently trying to remove as much as I can gcc and llvm from my stack (I am now targetting much more, probably too much). llvm is financed by apple (vanguard/blackrock), and gcc by the MIT/redhat(IBM). I wish I had that much money to hire ppl in order to remove that toxic c++.