6 ms·
Let's assume for a moment that the critique is correct: macros don't scale. OK. The C++ templating system can be used to accomplish many of the same things as a
by MichaelSalib 16y ago
Let's assume for a moment that the critique is correct: macros don't scale. OK. The C++ templating system can be used to accomplish many of the same things as a good macro system (see http://matt.might.net/articles/lambda-style-anonymous-functions-from-c++-templates/ http://matt.might.net/articles/lambda-style-anonymous-functi... for one example). Does the C++ templating system "scale"?
Or, to put it another way: lots of C++ shops ban the use of advanced templating metaprogramming. Has C++ suffered egregiously as a result?
- gruseom 16y agoHow does assuming that macros don't scale help in proving that macros don't scale? How does the complexity of C++ templates prove anything about syntactic abstraction in general or Lisp macros in particular?
- MichaelSalib 16y agoC++ templates are both less powerful and more complex and fragile than lisp macros. But no one ever says "oh, the C++ templating system does not scale" or "oh, C++ will never be successful until it eliminates/replaces the templating system"...do they?
- gruseom 16y agoI think I misunderstood your original point. Thanks for the clarification.