Re: [boost] The C++ Post-Processor

Subject: Re: [boost] The C++ Post-Processor
From: Stefan Seefeld (seefeld_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-11-01 14:57:42

On 10/18/2009 08:06 AM, Christian Schladetsch wrote:
>
> D is indeed interesting. But I wonder how far C++ can be taken with M4/C++
> before it breaks.
>    

...which seems to imply it isn't already broken. (Sorry, couldn't 
resist. ;-) )

>> I wish C++ templates were like D templates..
>>      
>
> I think we all wish C++ was something other than it is. Some more than
> others.
>
> But what can be done with Boost.Wave to make a C+++?
>    

C++++ ?? Now that sounds like a scary idea.

> And, is there any serious effort to make a formal and correct C++
> interpreter? It can of course be done. I will argue that it has to be done
> sooner than later if C++ is to remain relevant as an actively used (as
> opposed to necessarily maintained) language going forward.
>    

I fully disagree. C++, as every language, serves particular domains. 
There are other domains, much better served by other languages. Cramming 
more programming paradigms into C++ doesn't (necessarily) make it a 
better language.
I'm a big fan of multi-paradigm design (in C++). But I also recognize 
the limits of C++ (and all other languages I speak / use, for that 
matter), and thus I also like hybrid programming (e.g. 
http://www.boostpro.com/writing/bpl.html).

Instead of attempting to put more features into C++, let's try to fix 
the existing ones.

Regards,
         Stefan

-- 
       ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...