| |||||||||||||
Design failure ? Yes - C++ is a design failureDesign failure ? Yes - C++ is a design failurePosted Dec 9, 2005 9:06 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: lambda functions by ncm Parent article: The Boost C++ Libraries
It's hard to make a language powerful enough not to need fancy features coded in its core. In a very real sense, any directly-useful core-language feature that doesn't map to a machine instruction or two indicates a language design failure May be. But if you truly believe this then try to count number of machine instruction for single line cited above. Gosh. Even pointer assignment in C++ is quite non-trivial operation if youll take a look on machine instructions generated. If you really want language close to machine - you'll take C. If you need language with powerfull features - you'll take LISP, if you need "boss-approved" language - you'll take C++. C++ is all hype and marketing, really...
(Log in to post comments)
Design failure ? Posted Dec 10, 2005 5:40 UTC (Sat) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link] Ignorance must be a very comfy place, to make one so reluctant to leave it. One can never be lonely there.
|
|||||||||||||