By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
455,122 Members | 1,237 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 455,122 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

CPP++

P: n/a
Yes, I know I could ask this on comp.std.c++. At this point in my thinking
about the topic, it doesn't seem fromal enough to bring up there.

This seems like such a blatantly obvious idea that I believe it cannot be
new. I know there are some experienced C++ programmers who believe the CPP
is detrimental to the general use of C++. One reason the CPP is
indispensable is C compatability. There are some who believe the CPP is
also harmful to C. A unified effort to find a superior alternative to the
CPP may be worth persuing. Be that as it may, another approach might be
to extend the CPP with C++ specific features.

Does anybody know of efforts to do this? I specifically mean efforts
intended for standardization.

One problem that crossed my mind while contemplating the implementation of a
CPP++ that would effectively override the CPP is that trying to exclude
macro definitions such as are specified in the Standard C Library might
break C++ implementations which rely on these.

Rumor has it, Stroustrup may have been working on something along these
lines lately. Any truth to that?
--
If our hypothesis is about anything and not about some one or more
particular things, then our deductions constitute mathematics. Thus
mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we
are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.-Bertrand Russell
Jul 23 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
2 Replies


P: n/a
Steven T. Hatton wrote:
Yes, I know I could ask this on comp.std.c++. At this point in my thinking
about the topic, it doesn't seem fromal enough to bring up there.
You don't need to be formal to ask a standardization-related question in
comp.std.c++.
[..]
Does anybody know of efforts to do this? I specifically mean efforts
intended for standardization.
Somebody in comp.std.c++ might actually know about it.
[...]
Rumor has it, Stroustrup may have been working on something along these
lines lately. Any truth to that?


Why don't you ask him? He has his e-mail address published on his web
page, doesn't he?

V
Jul 23 '05 #2

P: n/a
* Steven T. Hatton:
Yes, I know I could ask this on comp.std.c++. At this point in my thinking
about the topic, it doesn't seem fromal enough to bring up there.

This seems like such a blatantly obvious idea that I believe it cannot be
new. I know there are some experienced C++ programmers who believe the CPP
is detrimental to the general use of C++. One reason the CPP is
indispensable is C compatability. There are some who believe the CPP is
also harmful to C. A unified effort to find a superior alternative to the
CPP may be worth persuing. Be that as it may, another approach might be
to extend the CPP with C++ specific features.

Does anybody know of efforts to do this? I specifically mean efforts
intended for standardization.


No, but there's a lot of exploration. The Boost library has a truly mind-
boggling preprocessor library based on just the features we have, taking
things to their utter limits. And the Spirit folks (Spirit is part of
Boost) have implemented a preprocessor called Wave, which as I understand it
has been adopted into Boost -- although I don't see it there yet.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Jul 23 '05 #3

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.