A Perspective on D from game industry

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 17 June 2014 at 03:08:48 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> Assuming you are talking about C macros:

I was talking about macros in general. :-)

> expert on the C preprocessor." Why would a freakin' macro 
> processor even have an ecological niche for a world leading 
> expert on it? The mind boggles.

You could say the same about Turing-machines, Lisp, template 
programming and propositional calculus? The world of computers is 
mind boggling!

> 6. Any syntax highlighter cannot work entirely correctly 
> without having a full preprocessor.

This is the point I was aiming at. Automatic translation becomes 
more difficult if you cannot deal with "meaningful units" on the 
parsing level.

Take for instance gofix/dfix. How on earth are you going to 
detect a deprecated feature in a string mixing and replace it 
with a new construct? It might be possible in some cases, but you 
actually have to explore all versioning-possibilities, meaning do 
an exhaustive search.

That sounds veeery challenging!

> 8. There are no looping macros, no CAR/CDR capabilities (Ddoc 
> has the latter).
>
> So there!

So it only goes to 8? Then CPP can't be all that loud.