Changes between Version 12 and Version 13 of PortingJournal
- Timestamp:
- 11/03/08 08:13:26 (15 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
PortingJournal
v12 v13 31 31 * phase 7: Link to a sample application and work out the remaining logic bugs 32 32 33 In between phases, of course, I would test certain theories to see how the D compiler handled code conversion. And because D has an interface type, I really hoped I could use that. It would allow me to circumvent some of the workarounds that the Java code required because of it's lack of the same . I further hoped that the port to D would significantly reduce the Java code complexity.33 In between phases, of course, I would test certain theories to see how the D compiler handled code conversion. And because D has an interface type, I really hoped I could use that. It would allow me to circumvent some of the workarounds that the Java code required because of it's lack of the same (XPCOM compatible interface, that is). I further hoped that the port to D would significantly reduce the Java code complexity. 34 34 35 35 '''Phase 1''' was ongoing too. But the initial research was enough to get me going. I found this online book quite useful: [http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xpcom/book/cxc/ Creating XPCOM Components]