Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 11:18:55 07/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 29, 2003 at 13:39:48, Dann Corbit wrote: >On July 29, 2003 at 09:38:30, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On July 29, 2003 at 06:12:34, Daniel Clausen wrote: >> >>>On July 28, 2003 at 19:00:41, Dieter Buerssner wrote: >>> >>>>On July 28, 2003 at 18:26:29, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >>>> >>>>>References, function inlining and namespaces are enaugh to use C++. >>>> >>>>Gerd, references is enough for me, to avoid C++. In the "old days", when I read >>>>code with a function call, like foo(a), I was sure, that a will be the same >>>>after the function call, than before. With C++, I cannot be sure anymore. >>> >>>But shouldn't the fact that in C++ things like "a=b+c" or "d->e" can do many >>>more things than a sane mind would expect them to do make up for it again? :) >> >>Absolutely, operator overloading rocks. >>Just try working with vectors and matrices in C :o > >That's on the one hand. > >On the other hand, there is nothing worse than operator overloading gone bad. >And I really mean it. It's intented to make things simpler, not more complicated. But your right of course, the powers of C++ is not for the timid. -S.
This page took 0.02 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.