Den 19.02.2012 01:12, skrev Nathaniel Smith:
>
> I don't oppose it, but I admit I'm not really clear on what the
> supposed advantages would be. Everyone seems to agree that
> -- Only a carefully-chosen subset of C++ features should be used
> -- But this subset would be pretty useful
> I wonder if anyone is actually thinking of the same subset :-).
Probably not, everybody have their own favourite subset.
>
> Chuck mentioned iterators as one advantage. I don't understand, since
> iterators aren't even a C++ feature, they're just objects with "next"
> and "dereference" operators. The only difference between these is
> spelling:
> for (my_iter i = foo.begin(); i != foo.end(); ++i) { ... }
> for (my_iter i = my_iter_begin(foo); !my_iter_ended(&i);
> my_iter_next(&i)) { ... }
> So I assume he's thinking about something more, but the discussion has
> been too high-level for me to figure out what.
C++11 has this option:
for (auto& item : container) {
// iterate over the container object,
// get a reference to each item
//
// "container" can be an STL class or
// A C-style array with known size.
}
Which does this:
for item in container:
pass
> Using C++ templates to generate ufunc loops is an obvious application,
> but again, in the simple examples
Template metaprogramming?
Don't even think about it. It is brain dead to try to outsmart the compiler.
Sturla
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
