[pubby]

> The reason you think this guy is using std::list incorrectly is because you're not thinking about his requirements.

The reasoning and requirements for him using intrusive lists was quite clear to me. The remaining article that starts at "Using intrusive lists" I found quite interesting and insightful.

My entire argument is against his evidence backing up statements like, "If you’re a programmer who uses the C++ STL std::list, you’re doing it wrong." It's unfair to improperly use std::list, compare it to a better solution, and then make a sweeping generalization. That's just outrageous.

[jemfinch]

It's clear from the subtitle of the blog ("Game design, game programming, deployment automation and more"), the title of the specific blog post, ("Avoiding game crashes related to linked lists"), and the very next paragraph of your quotation ("Based on watching the successes and failures of programmers writing games like Starcraft and Guild Wars...") that the author is talking about a very specific technique applied to a very specific sort of programming, and yet you're still complaining that he is making "a sweeping generalization"?

Stop wasting your time and ours arguing about an interpretation of his words the author never intended. Such literalistic argument-making serves only to mislead and misdirect, and it contributes nothing to the conversation.

[pubby]

Shot him a quick email for clarification:

> "Is "std::list considered harmful" in the general field of C++ or are you only talking about the very specific game programming field you used it for?"

> "I think it's harmful for all programming, but if you read the comments you'll find almost as many different opinions on the subject as comments!

The problem is that manually managing lists is error-prone, which is why I use a solution that automatically handles them; I think all programs, not just games, would benefit from their use."