dsimcha wrote: > On 11/30/2011 11:32 PM, Abrahm wrote: >> "Jesse Phillips"<jessekphillip...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:jb6qfv$1kut$1...@digitalmars.com... >>> What bearophile was referring to was the use of templates is common. >> >> Are you sure about that? What say you Bear? >> >>> D's >>> templates have the advantage of being easier on the eyes and more >>> powerful (with the inclusion of 'static if' in the language). >> >> Having "come from" C++land, and knowing what some people do with it, >> making it EASIER to apply templates does not seem necessarily a good >> thing to me. (Ref: template metaprogramming). That said, does your >> statement above about D's template machinery being "powerful" etc., >> mean "it's easier to do template metaprogramming in D"? If so, I, >> personally, do not find that any asset at all (though I know some >> surely will, for there have been books written on that "abhorrence"). >> > > A lot of people from C++ backgrounds say this.
I know that. > What they miss is that > template metaprogramming in C++ is so ugly because the language wasn't > designed for it. In D you can do readable template metaprogramming. I think it is because they can't iceskate. That is a major problem with public schooling, IMO.