automated C++ binding generation.. Booost D, NO , Not us. SIMD is more important.

[Iain Buclaw]

On 27 January 2012 18:38, Kagamin <spam at here.lot> wrote:
> On Wednesday, 25 January 2012 at 18:01:48 UTC, Zachary Lund wrote:
>>
>> I do not mind using a C library in D because of how straight forward it
>> is. But simply mentioning C++ in D seems to add unneeded complexity which
>> should be avoided. I think the answer to a question such as "What's the
>> alternative to Qt in D?" should not be "Qt bindings" but maybe a library
>> which imitates the implementation and/or interface of Qt UI widgets in
>> native D.
>
>
> http://www.ohloh.net/p/qt/estimated_cost
> some scary numbers


To be taken with a pinch of salt.  I raised an eyebrow or two when
looking at the estimated cost for GDC. ;-)


-- 
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';