From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-08 20:20:19
"Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)" <SeeWebsiteForEmail_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
>> Is it "cumbersome"? I don't know -- is template
>> metaprogramming "cumbersome"? I really believe they are very much alike.
>> Both were not in the initial design, both were later discovered, and both
>> are now "glorified" by some people, and hated by the others.
> First, the degree of cumbersomeness depends on what those tools are used
> for. But that's a tautology.
> Second, I disagree that the template engine and the preprocessor are
> similar. I see very very little similarity. The former is a mean pure
> functional language fostering pattern matching, recursion, and sporting
> knowledge and high integration with the non-templated part of C++. The
> computational model is known and powerful. In contrast, programming
> based on the token-oriented preprocessor uses arcane idioms and
> computations, which IMO just takes us back 40 years.
These all sound like moral judgements. Are pattern matching and
recursion "good" while token-oriented computation is "bad?"
Or are you getting at something else?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk