"Kay Schluehr" wrote: > I recommend studying C++ idioms carefully. > > http://www1.bell-labs.com/user/cope/Patterns/C++Idioms/EuroPLoP98.html
Thanks for the link; very useful indeed. > If Georges starts on greenfields he may have a look at Qt and it's > object library which is not only concerned with widgets. > > http://doc.trolltech.com/3.3/ > > BOOST is more high brow and I guess that it compiles slow because it > uses templates extensively. Template metaprogramming as a compile time > language was a funny discovery. Here is some prove of it's > capabilities: > > http://osl.iu.edu/~tveldhui/papers/2003/turing.pdf Many thanks to Kay and Bruno for suggesting Boost; I browsed through its numerous libraries and they're quite impressive ! They seem indispensable, especially for python (or other very high level language) programmers going back to C++. Some libraries that seem to be very relevant to pythoneers are: - any: brings dynamic typing in C++ - tuple; 'nuff said - iterator: out-of-the-box equivalents of itertools.{imap,ifilter,izip,count}, reversed(), and others not existing or applicable in python - tokenizer, string_algo and regex: similar functionality to str.* and re.* - bind, mem_fn, function, functional, lambda: first class callables, currying, higher order (functional) programming - assign: syntactic sugar through operator overloading for (relatively) readable container initialization: map<int,int> next = map_list_of(1,2)(2,3)(3,4)(4,5)(5,6); is actually valid and equivalent to next = dict([(1,2), (2,3), (3,4), (4,5), (5,6)]) - many, many more goodies, with or without respective standard python equivalent (threads, graphs, math utils, serialization, metaprogramming, etc). - and last but not least, Boost.Python. I don't think it's just a coincidence that among all languages they chose Python to make interoperable with C++ :-) Thanks again, George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
