Re: Alternative implementation of DocFiles (long, posted for archival purposes)

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Alexandre has said that C++ would be accepted given a good enough reason.
> Perhaps this is one? Though given how obscure some of that C++ is to
> somebody who doesn't know the language well, it might be best to just
> figure out what is missing from ours and fill it in.

I'm afraid this is the way to go. Even if we were accepting C++, it's
not good policy to simply replace entire pieces of code just like that.
I guess there's no silver bullet: someone has to take the time, 
understand both pieces of code, and port the relavant pieces over.
And it seems to me that "understand both pieces of code" is the hard
part, once that is done, the C++ -> C port is trivial in comparison.