Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th May 2007 15:39 UTC, submitted by Kelly Rush
Permalink for comment 238073
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-25
Not every. Just to mention the better known ones: MFC for Windows is C++, so is the whole BeOS (plus Haiku, Zeta) API.
Although you are right on BeOS, it is most definitely the exception, not the rule. And even then it is not a pure C++ API. Be's API is a C++ wrapper around a C based kernel. Technically, it could be considered a framework, but since it is the _primary_ programming interface for the OS calling it an API is entirely appropriate.
As for MFC, it is not an API at all. It's a framework and the 2 are not the same thing. Windows has a C API (Win32) just like Linux (and just about every other unix variant). MFC is conceptually equivalent to GTK++, it is a wrapper around a C API.
I personally think replacing a C based API with a C++ one is a bad decision, and I dont think that is really what we are talking about here. Although the article states this is a C++ API, Im pretty sure it is actually a wrapper around the existing C API.
I could be wrong but if I am I question the sanity of the development team as throwing away a working C API and replacing it with a C++ one is essentially starting over - EVERY piece of software written for this OS would be instantly rendered incompatible. Im pretty sure that is not the case here.