On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 09:40:22AM -0800, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I don't care about beauty, I > care about readability and understandability. > > I find well written, well formatted Lisp to be quite readable. Same > for C, Pascal, BASIC, and even FORTRAN up to a point. Even good > assembly language can be readable. > > C++ gives me a headache to read, as did Ada, COBOL, FORTH and a few > others. > > G
That's strange - I find precisely the reverse to be true. Well-written C++ makes it very easy to see what is going on; the structure and logic flow of any part of the program are very clear, and not obscured by messy implementation details. All that sort of stuff can be hidden inside object methods (and with inlining there's not even a performance penalty). Mind you, the important qualifier there is "well-written". And trying to make sense of something like the C++ standard template library is not an easy task; you need to understand just about all the nuances and ramifications of the language before diving into that. But understanding a program that *uses* the template library is a whole lot easier. Sometimes, in fact, it can be *too* easy. If the abstraction is done well a C++ program can appear deceptively simple. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
