On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 01:08:39AM -0400, Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
"Iain K. Hanson" <ikh@hansons.demon.co.uk> wrote
Yes, but until now boosters have kept PP to the implementation of libraries not pushing it out into user code. And PP does obscifate code for those of us that like to look at the implementation of libraries in order to learn.
Generating preprocessed code might help.
Yes, I know but it does involve more that just dropping the code on the printer.
I have a great deal of respect for the PP authors/mainters but it is still textual substitution so why not awk or python scripts.
Because the preprocessor is built in, which means no external tools is required.
Code generation will be here, like it or not. You don't like macros, but what's the alternative? MFC wizards? IDL?
Yes, but I thought boost was about quality C++ libraries and showing best C++ practice.
And, I hope, it is. However, what is "best C++ practice"? C++ is a multi-paradigm language, and it enabes variety of techniques. IMO this is a strength of C++, and this is what makes it fun, as opposed to some other, very popular, languages. I would even say this is _the_ strength of C++. So making best of these techniques is what makes best C++ practice.
Yes but I don't regard the preprocessor as a normally valid part of that multi-paradigm. I am much more in agreement with the views expressed in D&E. /ikh