max() in phobos, and English logic operators

[John Reimer]

On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 05:48:58 -0800, Sean Kelly <sean at f4.ca> wrote:

> David Qualls wrote:
>>  So, is it possible to use templates to define generic binary
>> operators; like 'and' and 'or', or a unary operator like 'not'?
>
> They're in the C++ standard library, so I don't see why not.
>
>> After looking at the mass of code it takes to implement a simple
>> generic max() or min() function in D, I'm really starting to pine
>> for my C preprocessor...
>>  #define max(a,b) ((a)>(b)?(a):(b))
>>  Yeah, I know it breaks if a or b include side effects, but it's
>> extremely READABLE!
>
> There has been a lot of work done in the C++ community to produce a  
> template function that is as functional as this simple macro.  In fact,  
> I think Andrei actually wrote a series of articles on it.  I think we  
> can do better in D because of the improved compile-time type  
> information, but it's difficult to match the simplicity of macro code  
> replacement.
>
>
> Sean


Blech!  I do not find C/C++ macros readable!  This small sample is hardly  
representative of the abuse of the preprocessor that exists in most of  
C/C++ land and is hardly an argument for having a PP in D.  Abuse of the  
CPP has made a horrid mess of code and makes it impossible to determine  
what is /really/ going on in there (I especially resent macros in macros  
in macros :P ).  I, for one, don't miss the preprocessor's absence from  
D.  D compile-time features are gradually progressing to the state where  
almost all CPP functionality is possible, anyway.  Those that are addicted  
to the CPP might do better to take a break from it and start experimenting  
with the D system.

Sure the CPP may inline things efficiently, but it's really just a poor  
man's templating system... a hack that's gone horribly wayward since long  
ago.

Oh... that feels better.  It seems I periodically have to bash the CPP...  
at least once a year, at least. :)

-JJR