[Gllug] C++ Templates, Opinions?

[Nix]

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Bruce Richardson announced authoritatively:
> Using C++ templates is effectively like using a sophisticated
> preprocessor.  This means that templates can allow you to avoid this
> trap but still have code reuse.

Sophisticated? It's Turing-complete!


I'd call it a macro-expander, not a preprocessor. You couldn't implement
C++ templating in any kind of preprocessor without reimplementing the
C++ parser in that preprocessor. (i.e., it can't be `pre'.)

> OTOH, templates are overused by former C-coders who don't really
> undestand OO and think it's all just a clever preprocessor hack.

IMHO, templates are underused by virtually everyone. C++ code written by
expert C++ programmers has template instantiations on virtually every
line (many of them uses of the standard library). Consult random posts
on comp.lang.c++.moderated for more examples than I can count. :)

I consider C++ a template-expansion language that happens to have
OO features as well. :)

> Then agaoin, there are some interesting things you can do with
> templates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_metaprogramming

Oh, Alexandescu is *smart*. Policy classes are a *genius* idea.
The only problem with template metaprogramming is that because
it wasn't actually an original design feature of C++, its
syntax is rather baroque and hard to read.

-- 
`The sword we forged has turned upon us
 Only now, at the end of all things do we see
 The lamp-bearer dies; only the lamp burns on.'
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug