x.sizeof vs typeid(x)

[Tom S]

Sergey Gromov wrote:
> What can I say.  I do not agree.  C++ committee is not the best 
> exemplar.  Looking into implementation should be required to learn the 
> details, not to understand what the hell is going on.  Creating the DSLs 
> should be a privilege of scripting languages, that's what they are for, 
> after all.

As long as you understand the language, you should understand more or 
less 'what the hell is going on'. Doesn't make much difference for 
comprehension, whether it's written using syntax sugar or not. Yet it 
may be more pleasant to read when it's *with* sugar. As for your 
argument with scripting languages? Do you suggest that the binding to 
Lua from C++ should be done... with a scripting language? That wouldn't 
make much sense. And yet, the folks have managed to create a very nice 
DSL within C++ that makes the code look really nice. Or should my GL 
wrapper *for D* be running through a scripting language?
What can I say. I do not agree. Scripting languages have their uses, but 
when the 'main' language is powerful enough, you don't need them that much.


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak
http://h3.team0xf.com/
h3/h3r3tic on #D freenode