From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-04 18:35:02
christopher diggins wrote:
> The custom IDL pre-processor is my favourite option. One of the biggest
> advantages (apart from being much much faster), is that it can also
> include a built in optimizer and we will have more coherent errors
> output earlier. That is by far the biggest problem with the other three
And the custom IDL pre-processor is my *least* favorite option :-) For
the simple fact that it will slow adoption. As it will require another
tool people will need to use. And that is especially painful for IDE
users, where they may not have an easy way to change the tool functionality.
I still prefer the current, CPP multiple macro, IDL because it presents
many more option for use and doesn't require additional resources.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk