Hi,

On 2/9/25 23:50, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 05:29:51PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>> Didier Kryn said on Tue, 2 Sep 2025 11:31:10 +0200
>>>     The arguments against its adoption may be that the build chain is
>>> slightly more complicated than C/C+,
>> Can we all please stop saying C/C++ and stop implying that C and C++
>> are similar? C is a wonderful hardware-independent assembly language
>> capable of doing anything allowed by the OS. Its only downside is that
>> without extreme carefulness, the compiled C program will have bugs that
>> could be catastrophically dangerous.
>>
>> C++ is a horribly botched attempt to bolt Object Orientation onto C, to
>> make C something it was never intended to be.
> But there is a C++ subset that is remarkably similar to C.
> Given a few macro definitions (mainly to define NULL indifferent
> ways) one can even se the C++ compiler to compile C programs.
> Why do this? To get slightly better static checking than the
> C compiler may provide.
>
> That C++ subset can legitimately be called C/C++.

I'm re-coding the whole simple-netaid project from scratch in Gtk
with a better design in mind that will provide IPv6 compatibility.
Previous version was written in Gtkmm, the C++ binding for Gtk.

Cheers,

Aitor.