On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 22:45:16 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:34:44AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 22:14:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
>It *is* a pretty crazy idea to prohibit STL, seeing as STL is
>what
>makes writing container-related C++ code bearable. I have
>horrible
>memories of the Bad Old Days when I must've reinvented linked
>lists
>at least 20 times, just because STL didn't exist in those
>days.
>
>When templates first came out, I was elated that finally I
>didn't
>have to implement Yet Another Linked List. Perhaps it took
>that kind
>of experience to appreciate templates. :-) People who didn't
>have to
>suffer through these kinds of limitations often don't
>appreciate what
>templates offer. (And that's C++ templates, with all their
>warts, not
>even speaking about D templates -- which are on a whole
>'nother
>level.)
[...]
You should talk with the Go guys which seem to be happy
re-inventing
the type of tools we used in C++, back in the days templates
were
still not available, somewhere around 1993 in my case.
On the contrary, I should shut up and let them spend their time
reinventing the wheel, while D moves forward to wider adoption.
;-)
Does anyone remember the pre-processor hacks from Borland C++?
[...]
I remember Borland C++, yes... but I don't recall what
preprocessor
hacks were there.
T
I don't recall any longer how they were exactly.
In can recall that they were implemented with macros. Then you
needed to #define a set of values and include the relevant file
multiple times for each set of parameter macros.
--
Paulo
