Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- From: Richard Heathfield <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 10:44:13 +0000 (UTC)
Chuck F. said:
> Jack Klein wrote:
>>
> ... snip ...
>>
>> I know I'll get flamed for this, but with the exception of
>> inheritance this is really nothing but syntactical sugar. You
>> can write object oriented programs in C right now.
>>
>> A perfect example is the FILE data type, declared an <stdio.h>.
>> It has a creator, fopen(), a destructor, fclose(), and all sorts
>> of methods you can invoke on it via its pointer, such as
>> fprintf(), fscanf(), fread(), fwrite(), between its successful
>> creation and its destruction.
>
> I see no reason for any fires. The only problem with your example
> is that you can't write (in general) that type in C.
I must have misunderstood what you mean, because I see no reason whatsoever
why one could not write (in general) that type in C.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- From: Chuck F.
- Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- References:
- Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- From: Albert
- Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- From: Jack Klein
- Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- From: Chuck F.
- Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- Prev by Date: Re: How to stop reading a file?
- Next by Date: Re: String reversing problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- Next by thread: Re: Adding the ability to add functions into structures?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
