Try Cello
> On 26 Nov 2014, at 22:38, Charles Thorley <char...@thorley.us> wrote: > > THIS IS NOT A TROLL > > I understand that there is zero love for object-oriented programming > methodologies on this list, and I am not particularly interested in this > strategy myself, although some languages that I like (i.e. Python) make > it hard to avoid in many ways. Regardless, this question is not meant > to poll suckless devs on their feelings surrounding baroque, > masturbatory abstraction; I know the answer to that question. > > I am attempting to learn C, and in my interweb travels I have > encountered Object Oriented C. One particular theme surrounding this > approach, which I found quite interesting, was the idea of creating safe > and robust interfaces through (relatively?) simple means; namely, > modeling the public/private metaphor in OOP by placing > differently-privileged code in separate files, and managing access > through header files. A link that describes this technique: > > http://www.embedded.com/electronics-blogs/object-oriented-c/4397794/Object-oriented-C-is-simple- > > I know just enough about programming to be intrigued by the idea, but > not nearly enough to understand its implications in practice. My > questions are: > > 1. Is this practice (potentially) suckless? > 2. If so, under what conditions would this be a suckless strategy? > > My apologies if this has been covered previously; googling the list did > not suggest that this is the case, although my attempts to learn C have > revealed that my google-fu has a giant blind spot when it comes to > producing useful results for single-character keywords. >
