On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:34:44AM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote: > On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 22:14:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: [...] > >It *is* a pretty crazy idea to prohibit STL, seeing as STL is what > >makes writing container-related C++ code bearable. I have horrible > >memories of the Bad Old Days when I must've reinvented linked lists > >at least 20 times, just because STL didn't exist in those days. > > > >When templates first came out, I was elated that finally I didn't > >have to implement Yet Another Linked List. Perhaps it took that kind > >of experience to appreciate templates. :-) People who didn't have to > >suffer through these kinds of limitations often don't appreciate what > >templates offer. (And that's C++ templates, with all their warts, not > >even speaking about D templates -- which are on a whole 'nother > >level.) [...] > You should talk with the Go guys which seem to be happy re-inventing > the type of tools we used in C++, back in the days templates were > still not available, somewhere around 1993 in my case.
On the contrary, I should shut up and let them spend their time reinventing the wheel, while D moves forward to wider adoption. ;-) > Does anyone remember the pre-processor hacks from Borland C++? [...] I remember Borland C++, yes... but I don't recall what preprocessor hacks were there. T -- For every argument for something, there is always an equal and opposite argument against it. Debates don't give answers, only wounded or inflated egos.