What's better about Ruby than Python?
dave at boost-consulting.com
Thu Aug 21 23:39:02 CEST 2003
Roy Smith <roy at panix.com> writes:
> One of the few things I like about C++ is that between const, templates,
> and inline, the need for the macro preprocessor has been almost
Har! If anything it has been increased! Boost, a haven for template
experts, has a whole library which formalizes a programming system for
the preprocessor (http://www.boost.org/libs/preprocessor) just so we
can eliminate the nasty boilerplate that arises in our template code.
> Still, you see a lot of code which goes out of its way to
> do fancy things with macros, almost always with bad effect.
I guess it's a question of how badly you hate maintaining 25 different
copies of similar code. And, BTW, I tried to "just use Python to
generate C++" first and using the preprocessor turns out to be
BTW, the C++ preprocessor is a fairly weak macro system. A higher
level metaprogramming facility that knows more about the underlying
language could be a lot cleaner, clearer, safer, and more expressive.
More information about the Python-list