🚀 go-pugleaf

In <1c2nkpINN2sk@ub.d.umn.edu> cbusch@ub.d.umn.edu (Mmmm...) writes:

>Also, will the new c++ standard have anything like 'with' like
>pascal has?  I suppose OOP can somewhat get abused by such
>a command, but it could be very useful for typing shortcuts 
>amoung other things...

... things like making code unreadable.  The trouble with WITH is that
to comprehend the identifiers in the WITH block, you must be familiar
with the record type that has been opened.  Far superior is the use
of references which reduce typing, but can stilled be followed.

For example,

        var a,b:integer;

	with foo[bar] do
	  a:=b;

What is "a"?  What is "b"?  Maybe they are fields of foo[bar], maybe not.

But with:

	int a,b;

	int& fb=foo[bar];

	fb.a=b;

The secret is revealed that "a" is part of foo[bar], while "b" is the local.
All without knowing what type foo[bar] is.


Being from a Pascal and Modula-2 background, I have become familiar with
the uglinesses of those languages so-called "features".  [Over]use of nested
procedures is another scourge to the maintainer.


--
Warwick
--
  _-_|\      warwick@cs.uq.oz.au            /Disclaimer:
 /     * <-- Computer Science Department,  /  
 \_.-._/     University of Queensland,    /   C references are NULL && void*
      v      Brisbane, Australia.        /