Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #68755

Re: a style question:

Show all headers | View raw

Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 31/08/2015 13:21, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>> On 31/08/2015 11:24, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>
>>>> Usr::Graphics::BezierPathSimple<Math::real64_t, GREEN>
>>>
>>> Those guys really like to spell things out don't they?
>>
>> Well, yes.  When technical things are being specified that are usually
>> spelled out in quite a technical way.
>>
>> But Usr::Graphics::BezierPathSimple and Math::real_64_t are just a names
>> that use name spaces to avoid clashes.  What do you do to solve that
>> problem?
>
> (1) Use a shorter alias for long-winded qualifiers

That was Malcolm's choice.

> (2) Use name-space defaults

Ditto (unless you are suggesting that some user namespace should be an
automatic default).

> (3) *Don't* require "Math::" for primitive types! (A shorter name than
> "real_64_t" wouldn't go amiss either. What on earth is wrong with
> "real" or "real64"?)

C++ does not require "Math::" for primitive types.  It was Malcolm's
choice to invent that type so everyone could clutch at their pearls in
horror.

In short, you agree with the way C++ is designed in these respects -- you
just don't like how Malcolm wrote the (admittedly hypothetical) example.

>> And the whole thing is the instantiation of a generic type
>> with two parameters.
>
> Yes, now that you say it. When you stripped out all the extraneous
> stuff, it was Name<real, GREEN>; that looked like a template, yet not
> a template definition.
>
>> I.e. what is, in your view, the proper way to write that?
>
> I like using keywords to specify exactly what is being done. Perhaps
> not as long-winded as this, but along these lines:
>
> define template ......
> instantiate template ....
>
> Then there is no excuse for not knowing what is happening. (Better
> than trying to infer what is being done from a mess of punctuation and
> syntax.)

But you did not show an equivalent, so of course you can imply that it
can be simpler.  Show, in your language, the instantiation of a generic
type with two parameters -- one a non-standard real type and the other a
constant value.  The simplest syntax is likely to be very similar to
C++, but do show how much better you can make it.

>> How do you do that in your private language?
>
> In my compiled language, I don't have templates. If I did, I would
> make it more obvious, trust me. Or more likely I would put them into a
> customisation sub-language that most people wouldn't have to read, or
> be tempted to write, because I don't think this stuff belongs in
> every-day code.
>
> While my dynamic language doesn't have templates; it doesn't really
> need them as you effectively get generics for free.

No, you get them at a price, but you don't show the code, so I have no
idea what the price is.  It may be that the type can't even be
specified.  I can't tell yet.

>>> But yet, you say this is something returned by a function. So I don't
>>> know what the hell it might be. What a language!
>>
>> The fact that you don't know what something is at first glance is an odd
>> criterion to use.  I can imagine people looking at
>>
>>     PAR (DO n PLUSAB 1; start siever (first, n) OD, sieve (first))
>> or
>>     (^^) :: (Fractional a, Integral b) => a -> b -> a
>>
>> and saying "What a language!".  Could it simply be that some things are
>> complicated to specify, and that making it transparent at first glace
>> might be counter-productive in the long run?
>
> Neither of these are as offensive to me as typical C++ code is.

Yes, I know that.  I'm just pointing out how odd that criterion is in
such a technical field.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

a style question: G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 02:30 -0700
  Re: a style question: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-31 21:40 +1200
  Re: a style question: jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2015-08-31 09:52 +0000
  Re: a style question: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-31 03:24 -0700
    Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 11:50 +0100
      Re: a style question: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-31 13:21 +0100
        Re: a style question: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-31 05:41 -0700
        Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 14:55 +0100
          Re: a style question: Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-31 15:50 +0100
            Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 18:40 +0100
      Re: a style question: Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-08-31 17:46 +0200
        Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 17:27 +0100
          Re: a style question: Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-08-31 18:42 +0200
      Re: a style question: Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-08-31 17:41 +0000
        Re: a style question: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-31 15:33 -0700
          Re: a style question: Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-01 08:34 +0000
      Re: a style question: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-01 07:40 +1200
        Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 21:36 +0100
          Re: a style question: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-01 08:51 +1200
            Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-31 22:37 +0100
              Re: a style question: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-31 15:24 -0700
                Re: a style question: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-02 19:37 +1200
          Re: a style question: jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2015-08-31 23:33 +0000
            Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-01 01:13 +0100
              Re: a style question: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-01 18:21 +1200
              Re: a style question: jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2015-09-01 15:23 +0000
                Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-01 18:06 +0100
                Re: a style question: Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-09-01 20:39 +0000
                Re: a style question: jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2015-09-01 20:45 +0000
                Re: a style question: Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-01 22:53 +0100
            Re: a style question: Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-31 17:51 -0700

csiph-web