As I was writing this response to Ben I came to realize that this is
a religious issue. I believe libraries should be as simple and general
purpose as possible, and the new STACK_OF() stuff is moving in the
other direction. If no one else thinks like I do I'll shut up and like
it. But here's
Anonymous wrote:
As I was writing this response to Ben I came to realize that this is
a religious issue. I believe libraries should be as simple and general
purpose as possible, and the new STACK_OF() stuff is moving in the
other direction. If no one else thinks like I do I'll shut up and
Let's not go down the C++ path, ever!
-Original Message-
From: Paul Keogh [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 7:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Type-safe stacks
Have you considered using the stack template class from the STL ?
I appreciate
Ahh, I misunderstood what you meant by macros.
I thought you meant things like:
#define sk_X509_push(sk, v) \
sk_push((stack*)sk, (char*)v)
Which is, of course, sub-optimal. Having a bunch of
one-line wrapper functions isn't unreasonable.
On the other hand, since stack.[ch] are so small,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahh, I misunderstood what you meant by macros.
I thought you meant things like:
#define sk_X509_push(sk, v) \
sk_push((stack*)sk, (char*)v)
Which is, of course, sub-optimal. Having a bunch of
one-line wrapper functions isn't unreasonable.
Would I do
Ben Laurie wrote:
Don't forget that templates are really just a glorified preprocessor
(well, OK, they aren't now but they were at first) :-)
Seriously, you can do a lot of what templates do with a preprocessor if
you try hard enough. Anyway, the interesting stuff all happens here, in
Dr Stephen Henson wrote:
Ben Laurie wrote:
Don't forget that templates are really just a glorified preprocessor
(well, OK, they aren't now but they were at first) :-)
Seriously, you can do a lot of what templates do with a preprocessor if
you try hard enough. Anyway, the
Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
If everyone thinks it is a terrible idea I'm prepared to undo it. I'll
fight first, though, coz I think it is a great idea :-)
I, for one, do think it is a terrible idea and I "vote against" these
changes. Marvelous macros are neat and all, but
- They
Anonymous wrote:
Ben Laurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
If everyone thinks it is a terrible idea I'm prepared to undo it. I'll
fight first, though, coz I think it is a great idea :-)
I, for one, do think it is a terrible idea and I "vote against" these
changes. Marvelous macros are neat
