Re: C++ && squid 3.0

On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Robert Collins wrote:

> On the squid-3 page it suggests using C++. I've got no issue with that
> (in fact I love C++ in many ways)... my $0.02 is that we don't need a
> re-write. Squid is rather modular now (and rapidly getting more so).
> Simple refactoring into C++ module by module should be very easy to do,
> and not incur a huge delay in releases or the overhead of reinventing
> the current wheel before we can move on.

IMHO, C++ code is not just a better C code. Simply converting existing
C code so that it compiles with g++ is possible, may be even
beneficial, but is probably not worth the effort. To gain the benefits
of C++, a significant change of Squid core interfaces is unavoidable.

Yes, there still will be modules and such, but the relationship
between related modules and code sharing principles are likely to
change a lot.

If I have to decide now, I would propose two semi-independent C++
migration activities:
        - conversion of basic data types to full-featured classes
        - overall design changes and converting modules to classes
          and algorithms

There is no doubt, however, that most of the functional code within
the modules will be preserved almost as is (syntax-like changes are
trivial and not important).

$0.02,

Alex.
Received on Wed Mar 21 2001 - 08:20:11 MST