On Tue Sep 29 14:47 , Onno Kortmann sent: >Regarding the 'template stuff' (from your other post): I thought that it was >giving the most abstract view and the most reduction in code size and I also >have the opinion that in 2009, one ought to use templates if it makes sense. >Compilers should support them. ...
Templates are tricky. Supporting them is not the same as supporting them well. That said, I think there are at least two cases where trickiness is not an issue: It's a class template and all methods are inlined. Explicit instantiation is practical and non-annoying. I think yours qualify under the former and mine under the latter. >... I am somewhat flexible in my opinion here, but >I think that a possible replacement of the template stuff should be at least >as concise and clear as mine is IMHO :-) >And it replaces A LOT of redundant code and creates a central point to attach >tracing probes to the I/O parts of the simulator. I remember being dubious about this, but I can look at it again. Removing redundant code is important. Code that isn't there doesn't need testing. -- Michael Hennebry henne...@cableone.net "War is only a hobby." ---- Msg sent via CableONE.net MyMail - http://www.cableone.net _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list Simulavr-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
