On 12/4/2013 9:10 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 08:57:56AM -0500, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: >> In the future, I suggest you refrain from using terms like "modern >> programming practices" when trying to convince developers (at least this >> developer anyway) that the change you are proposing is worthwhile. This >> is an automatic red flag for me. It sounds like a bunch of marketing >> hype rather than a well thought out technical argument. While I agree >> std::xxxx is more readable than using namespaces, there is nothing >> "modern" about writing readable code. Good coding practices have been >> around since "good old days" of assembly and C. Over the last 25 years, > > Practical example of 'modern programming practice' (implemented by boost > and other)... FUNCTORS
They are similar in concept callbacks (function pointers) in C. Granted, passing the state information via function pointer can be tricky but it can be done. Obviously C++ makes this a bit more elegant to implement but it's not a modern concept. > > Really really unconvenient & ugly & a total waste of time in 90% of the > cases. > > Really miss lambdas in C++ :P (they say they are adding them... I fear > the result...) > They are supposedly part of the C++11 standard. I haven't tried them yet so I have no idea how well they work. I think I'll leave that up to the brave folks who like to bleed on the edge :) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
