Neal Becker <ndbecker2@gmail.com> wrote:
That's harsh! Do you have any specific features you dislike? Are you objecting to the syntax?
I have programmed C++ for almost 15 years. But I cannot look at the proposed code an get a mental image of what it does. It is not a specific feature, but how the code looks in general. This is e.g. not a problem with Eigen or Blitz, if you know C++ it is not particularly hard to read. Not as nice as Fortran or Cython, but ut is still not too bad. Boost multiarray suffers from not being particularly readable, however, but this proposal is even worse. I expect that scientists and engineers will not use an unreadable array API. When we write or maintain numerical algorithms we need to get a mental image of the code, because we actually spend most of the time looking at or reading the code. I agree that C++ needs multidimensional arrays in the STL, but this proposal will do more harm than good. In particular it will prevent adoption of a usable array API. And as consequence, it will fuel the problem it is trying to solve: C++ programmers will still used homebrewed multiarray classes, because there is no obvious replacement in the standard library. Sturla