Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Feb 21 05:26, Warren Young wrote:
>> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> Really? Show me an example which isn't much
harder to understand than
>>> the equivalent C code.
>> template <class T>
>> std::string foo(const T& x)
>> {
>> std::ostringstream outs;
>> outs << x << and << maybe
<< other << stuff;
>> return outs.str();
>> }
>>
>> (Aside: This looks pointlessly trivial, but it's a
simplified version of
>> real code in MySQL++ (http://tangentsoft.ne
t/mysql++/). It would just
>> muddy the waters to talk about the reason MySQL++
does this.)
>>
>> To do that with C functions (maybe strto*() instead
of printf()) you'd have
>> to create a set of template specializations for
every T you know about to
>> call the right C function with the right arguments.
Any time you add to
>> the list of supported T's, you have to add template
specializations.
>
> Argh. Using templates as an example for simplicity is
somewhat daring.
> Templates, liberally used, are a good way to make code
unreadable.
>
> IMHO.
>
> FWIW.
>
> YMMV.
>
> YMCA.
>
>
> Corinna
>
C++ is like Unix, people that don't like it is because they
don't
understand it.
Cheers,
Danilo
|
