| |||||||||||||
landley, stop hitting the Turing complete strawmanlandley, stop hitting the Turing complete strawmanPosted Dec 27, 2012 2:04 UTC (Thu) by jwakely (subscriber, #60262)In reply to: GNU sed 4.2.2 released; maintainer resigns by landley Parent article: GNU sed 4.2.2 released; maintainer resigns
> As for the complexity of the build process, templates are literally turing complete at compile time (there's no guarantee a C++ program compilation will ever terminate)
Oh noes, how will I ever stop the compiler from consuming all the computing resources in the universe and turning the Earth to grey goo?
Oh wait, Ctrl-C. Or it will just hit an instantiation limit, or memory limit.
Has this ever been a problem for anyone? If not why do you keep making this stupid argument? (http://lwn.net/Articles/504751/ for the last time I know of.)
> and teaching a debugger to name demangle a function pointer to an overloaded member function in a virtual base class is hard enough without bringing cross compiling into it.
How often do you need to do that and can't use existing demangler code?
(Log in to post comments)
landley, stop hitting the Turing complete strawman Posted Dec 27, 2012 8:50 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] Oh wait, Ctrl-C. Or it will just hit an instantiation limit, or memory limit. The fact that we can not classify all the programs is not a big deal, the fact that often C++ programs are very slow to compile is. Not only C++ templates are Turing complete language, they are extremely inefficient Turing complete language. Still, as Cyberax rightfully pointed out: C++ is the only game in town for what it does, so we are stuck with it.
|
|||||||||||||