[convolvatron]

just a contrary opinion. I read the c++ book in the very early 90s. someone told me it was the future of programming.

every single c++ shop I've worked at since has said, 'well, yes the language is a mess, but if you stick to a well controlled subset, its really pretty good'

and all of those shops, without exception, have dragged in every last weird and contradictory feature of what is a really enormous language. so I guess the 'sane subset' argument is ok in theory, but really not in practice.

i've actually seen some really* clever mixin/metaprogramming with templates. it was a total disaster, and in a different environment it could be a really great approach. i could never understand it in complete detail, but if C is a 38 that you can use to blow your foot off, C++ is a 20ga shotgun with a pound of c4 strapped to your head.

[WalterBright]

> and all of those shops, without exception, have dragged in every last weird and contradictory feature of what is a really enormous language. so I guess the 'sane subset' argument is ok in theory, but really not in practice.

To be fair, this happens with every language I've been associated with, even C. Just look at those people who do metaprogramming with the C preprocessor. It's madness!

I used to do that too, as a young programmer. It took about 10 years to grind that out of me. One advantage of us older programmers is we show how clever we are by writing amazingly simple and understandable code. :-)

[dingo_bat]

> To be fair, this happens with every language I've been associated with, even C. Just look at those people who do metaprogramming with the C preprocessor. It's madness!

To be fair, C++ metaprogramming with templates makes C preprocessor look like an insignificant ant in front of a truck.

[maxxxxx]

"dragged in every last weird and contradictory feature of what is a really enormous language"

This happens with every language that has a lot of features. You have to try them before you can form an opinion.

[Footkerchief]

> This happens with every language that has a lot of features.

Seems like the key is to not have a lot of features, then.

[AnimalMuppet]

But languages with not a lot of features trap you unless you never need that feature (or unless you're fine with implementing that feature yourself in what the language gives you).

[maxxxxx]

Then we should be using FORTRAN 77 forever?