[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [paho-dev] Sorry to be a pain!
|
I think looking forward rather than back is the right approach for a C++
interface. There is always the C interface to fall back on.
Ian
On 21/05/13 18:12, Frank Pagliughi wrote:
Yes, there is no problem for me to contribute it. I'm working on it on
my own and am self-employed, so there are no company entanglements
either. The Eclipse IP & licensing should not present a problem.
Currently, most of the basic async functionality is working (using the
C library/API, as is), and the example apps are ported and working. I
literally cut and pasted the Javadoc API as a starting point, so the
coverage and match to Java should be pretty good.
As I mentioned, I used C++11 extensions (shared_ptr, mutex, &
condition_variable) to get something working quickly for my own use. I
will post it in this form, and then we can discuss the API, and how to
pull the implementation back for older compilers. I'm thinking to
write drop-in replacements for the missing std classes to keep the API
intact. Look forward rather than back. Otherwise user apps would need
to perform memory management.
Frank
On 05/21/2013 11:25 AM, Ian Craggs wrote:
Hey Frank,
no problem. I appreciate the feedback - it's good to know that the
code is being used! And I realize that I have some thinking to do
about the tokens, and also explaining more about how the APIs were
intended to be used.
I'd like to get a C++ layer into Eclipse Paho too, so if you are in a
position to contribute your code (Eclipse has rules about
contributions related to IP, licensing, etc) that would be a big
help. If not, for any reason, then I'll go ahead with my own, and
take comments of course.
Ian
