🚀 go-pugleaf

102757.1646@compuserve.com (Scott Robert Ladd) wrote:
>>Are you talking about:
>
>>  1) the Working Paper specification, or,
>>  2) The Stepanov/Lee specification?
>
>I guess I'm ignorant here; what the heck is a "Stepanov/Lee
>specification, and what is its relevance to Stnadard C++?

  The original document describing STL by Stepanov and Lee
is separately maintained from the specification in the
Working Paper, and presented quite differently. While
they generally agree on most details, this is one they
appear not to on.

>
>>...generally you WILL be writing almost all modern C++ code as templates.
>
>While I certainly use a LOT of templates in my work (heck, I've
>written four books full of template examples), I DON'T see any
>obligation to use them for all code. I've always been a believer in
>using the right tool for the right job; my whole reason for using C++
>is that it offers considerable flexibility. In many cases, template
>are over-used; and I find that templates lead to lazy programming,
>where a "generic" tool is used in place of a tuned,
>application-focused piece of code.

I guess I'm biased, being a library builder rather than
application oriented.


-- 
John Max Skaller               voice: 61-2-566-2189
81 Glebe Point Rd              fax:   61-2-660-0850
GLEBE NSW 2037                 email: maxtal@suphys.physics.oz.au
AUSTRALIA                      email: skaller@maxtal.com.au
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]