3 ms·
Yeah but now we can do it without having to allow macros.
by jayd16 5y ago
Yeah but now we can do it without having to allow macros.
- mgaunard 5y agoWhy would you disallow a powerful and useful language feature? It's better to be practical than dogmatic.
- spaetzleesser 5y agoBut why? What's wrong with macros? I agree that you can do stupid stuff things with macros but before disabling macros I would get rid of reflection first. With reflection you can do way more stupid things than you can do with macros.
- moron4hire 5y agoNah. Macros allow library developers to do really stupid things that can't be improved on. Reflection lets library users get around the regular stupid things library developers do.
- spaetzleesser 5y ago"Reflection lets library users get around the regular stupid things library developers do." Like marking variables as private?
- moron4hire 5y agoYes, especially if that variable is an IDisposable that the library author also forgot to dispose. Like Microsoft's own System.IO.Ports.SerialPort with its underlying data stream.
- spaetzleesser 5y agoWhy do we have things like "private" and "protected" if people can circumvent them?
- moron4hire 5y agoBecause only a Sith deals in absolutes