Am 30.10.2014 um 21:04 schrieb H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 03:52:51PM +0000, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d
wrote: [...]
CERN remains at the centre of so much good software development.
Which is why they use Python.
Wait, what? Good software development? At CERN?? Really??? As a friend
of mine one put it:
"At CERN, 10% of people writing code know what they're doing, 45%
don't know what they're doing but are aware of it, and 45% don't know
what they're doing but think they do because software development is
'so much easier than Physics'".
I've seen recently (as in weeks ago) written Python code from ATLAS.
It's so atrocious it doesn't even look like Python. Most people I know
still working at CERN don't even know what C++11 is, much less use it.
[...]
It's probably a good thing they don't know what C++11 is, otherwise they
might start writing even more horrendous code using operator""(). I
suppose I've been a frog in the well, but it was only yesterday when I
discovered that C++11 allows user-defined literals via operator""().
Skimming over the docs for that today, I couldn't help but shake my head
at just how wrong the whole conception of it is. It's just *asking* to
be abused for writing inscrutable, unreadable, unmaintainable code. I
honestly have trouble imagining any sane use case for it apart from
submitting obfuscated code contest entries. But hey, what's one more
nail in a coffin already crawling with monstrosities like
Boost.Xpressive?
That was extended in C++14, for example:
#include <string>
int main()
{
using namespace std::string_literals;
auto s1 = "Hello\0\0World"s;
}
// s1 == std::string
There a few other pre-defined literals.
