On 2/5/11 9:48 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 2/5/11 9:05 PM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
On 05/02/2011 13:42, Joel de Guzman wrote:
I think his argument is that with lambda expressions, the code is at the call site. However, I'd also argue that for more complex code spanning several statements, it is good practice to refactor them into their own functions. Overly complex lambda functions are a poor form.
So Boost.Phoenix self-acknowledges that it can only be used to write trivial things?
What are you saying? Did I say that? You must be confused because phoenix is not just about inline lambda functions, you know. There's also phoenix function, remember?
In functional programming, there is no difference between defining lambdas and functions (except the former cannot be recursive), and it is not viewed as bad practice to have functions spanning a couple hundred lines.
Sure! But so what's your point?
Limiting the discussion to C++, show me a function spanning a couple hundred lines and I'll show you ways to refactor the code into smaller functions and make the code more readable and maintainable. Overly complex functions are a poor form! More so for lambda functions because they add clutter to the enclosing function. Imagine: std::for_each(f, l, ...some 100 lines of code here ); Eeeeww! Yuck! I'll give the one who wrote that a rotten egg as an award! Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boostpro.com http://spirit.sf.net