Re: [boost] Re: MPL containers and algorithms

From: Joel de Guzman (djowel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-13 00:16:29

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terje Slettebø" <tslettebo_at_[hidden]>

> > That's it, 9 lines of code (7 without braces), one template, two typedefs,
> > done. :)<
> >
> > ...relying on a ton of scaffolding, some of which doesn't even exist!
>
> Yep, it does. So does C++, compared to the assembly code it's translated
> too. However, the higher level of abstraction also gives it its power.
>
> It's similar with metaprogramming.
>
> >No more questions, your honor. I rest my case.
> >
> > Besides, I frankly find the code abominable. It attempts to look and feel
> > like runtime C++, and to me it doesn't do it.
>
> Well, I guess this is subjective.
>
> Of course, you're free to use "metaprogramming assembler", too.

I think you missed the point. Andrei and Paul never mentioned anything
about using "metaprogramming assembler". They *do* advocate using
a metaprogramming library. Their point is that the client interface would
have been more straight-forward (and elegant) without the "unecessary"
abstractions that might or might not be useful. Everybody pays for features
they do not need.

--Joel