Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>>> bool BranchList::remove(string const & s)
>>>> {
>>>> List::size_type const size = list.size();
>>>> - list.remove_if(bind2nd(match(), s));
>>>> + list.remove_if(bind(equal_to<string>(),
>>>> + bind(&Branch::getBranch, _1),
>>>> + s));
>>>> return size != list.size();
>>>> }
>>>
>> | Lars! Be nice to us! Add comments explaining what this stuff is
>> | equivalent to. If you're not careful, your fellow developers will
>> | start to view you as the evil genius who obfuscates their
>> | perfectly reasonable code and then laughs at their confusion, "Mu
>> | hah hah hah!"
>>
>> Where is the obfuscation?
This is the Q I'd like to have answered.
>>
>> Actually I find the new version a lot clearer than the old one. Now
>> you can actually see what "match" is doing: equal_to. std::equal_to
>> takes to parameters, the elements to be compared, in this case:
>> Branch::getBranch() and s.
>>
>> So: remove the element if equal_to is true when supplied with the
>> parameters Branch::getBranc() (for each element of the list) and s.
>
| Yes, I understand that, because I have used bind a lot myself.
| However, a comment to this effect would be good too.
Why? To learn C++ programmers how to read C++?
(and I am not trying to sound elitist)
>> | Would boost::lambda help here?
>>
>> The code would probably be even clearer with boost::lambda.
>
| Try me. I've never actually used it, so would like to see a real-world
| example
I have never used it.
(among the reasons: it is not getting standarized now, it is really a
new paradigm for C++ programmers)
>> PS. To get the more "obfuscated" stuff you should have picked the
>> make_function_output_iterator stuff. Or the operator-> stuff...
>
| I wasn't trying to start a competition on who can write the most
| obfuscated code. I was complaining that you are in danger of being
| viewed in such a light. Unfair to you and unfair to the rest of us.
My problem is that I cannot see how I can write a comment that is
clearer than the code present. I do expect c++ programmers to
understand the standard functors, and in a little while I also expect
them to know of/understand std::tr1::bind.
So what should the comment say?
And did I say that I don't think this kind of code is obfuscated?
--
Lgb
