🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BBC.91Jan29105852@sicilia.rice.edu> Benjamin Chase <bbc@rice.edu> writes:
> If you feel that such an implementation is trivial, how do you feel
> about implementing the version that I described in an earlier post?

Ben, you're confusing two issues. One is the ease of implementing
composable functions in C. The other is the difficulty of implementing
polymorphic functions in C.

Once you realize you're confusing the two issues, you should realize
that your complaints have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

(To answer the question, though: AT&T's cfront is a quite usable
implementation of what yuckies these days call ``objects,'' including
the sort of polymorphism you're looking for. It does take a bit of work
to implement objects; my shortest respectable C macro set for the job is
a few hundred lines. There, now you know how I feel about implementing
what you described in an earlier post.)

---Dan