Hi Maciek,
Thanks for sharing this!
2008/9/14 Maciek Godek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
> Using some hints you gave me, I've implemented a really tiny
> object system -- and I would like to know your opinion ("why
> it's still better to use goops" :D)
You have already given a good summary of the pros and cons yourself, below.
> It has, as I can
> tell, a few advantages over goops -- mainly, storing objects
> as vectors allows for an efficient and convenient object treating
> from C level, so boatmen should be satisfied.
> Secondly, people accustomed to the object.method() notation
> (like myself) won't feel lost and the global namespace will be
> kept clean.
> The system certainly isn't as complex as goops and doesn't
> handle types (in general) so exquisitely. Also, it's unable to
> support multiple inheritance efficiently (single inheritance isn't
> supported as well, but this could be done quite easily if needed),
> but that's not my point.
I think the only big thing you missed was GOOPS's level of
customizability, which one you to create virtual slots, automatically
define slots for classes of a particular metaclass, and such like.
It's good to have another option than GOOPS. I imagine the major
reason someone might choose to use SOS instead of GOOPS would be the
C-level access. (And I hope we can one day work out something like
that for GOOPS!)
Regards,
Neil
