On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Andrew Venikov <[email protected]> wrote: > Bram Moolenaar wrote: >> >> Andrew Venikov wrote: >> >> > in c++0x it will be possible to use lambda functions. >> > >> > So, for example, this: >> > >> > [](int n) { return n+ 1; } >> > >> > Will become valid c++. >> > >> > Unfortunately it breaks current C++ highlighting. >> > After a line like the one above, all curly brackets will be >> highlighted by VIM as "unmatched", making reading the code really hard. >> > >> > Is there a quick way to fix that? >> >> You can vote for the C++ standard to not add things like this to make >> the language even more cryptic. > > > Funny you should mention it, but the whole reason for the lambda > functions (and not just in C++) is to make code more readable. > Oftentimes when you need to pass a function or a function-object to > a generic algorithm, this function would consist of only a short expression. > Currently, you're forced to define this expression else-where, where > it's out of context. The lambda functions allow you to specify the logic > in-line so that the whole algorithm would be in one place. > > I understand the knee-jerk reaction to this new feature, but the C++ > community has been anxiously waiting for lambdas (closures) for a > long time for a reason. The other languages (JavaScript, Python, Ruby, > Haskell, heck even Perl has it) have had them for a long time. > Lisp had them since, oh 1965? > > >> >> Well, perhaps that's not a quick way, but it will make programmers who >> try to decipher C++ programs a lot more sane. > > I guess C++ does have a bad rep in this area. But the reason for that is > that there was a wide-spread misconception that C++ is just C with classes. > And a lot of C programmers (good and bad) tried to write C++ code with C > mindset. You just can't do that. > > But I promise you that things will get much better, as C++ community has > evolved since then and proper C++ techniques are much more wide-spread now. > Reading a properly written C++ code is like watching a beautify painting. > It's a work of art. > > But the bottom line is: > > PLEASE, don't make me chose between my favorite language and my favorite > editor. > > > Thanks, > Andy. > > -- > You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. > Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. > For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php > No one is forcing you to make a choice. There MUST be a way to figure this out. I dunno however. u can work it out after reading the syntax schema of c.vim. I believe it's easy for you, because it's also a very very beautiful painting.
-- If the dream is BIG enough,the facts don't count! -- You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
