<Andrew.Venikov@genband.com> wrote:
> Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>>
>> Andrew Venikov wrote:
>>
>> > in c++0x it will be possible to use lambda functions.
>> >
>> > So, for example, this:
>> >
>> > [](int n) { return n+ 1; }
>> >
>> > Will become valid c++.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately it breaks current C++ highlighting.
>> > After a line like the one above, all curly brackets will be
>> highlighted by VIM as "unmatched", making reading the code really hard.
>> >
>> > Is there a quick way to fix that?
>>
>> You can vote for the C++ standard to not add things like this to make
>> the language even more cryptic.
>
>
> Funny you should mention it, but the whole reason for the lambda
> functions (and not just in C++) is to make code more readable.
> Oftentimes when you need to pass a function or a function-object to
> a generic algorithm, this function would consist of only a short expression.
> Currently, you're forced to define this expression else-where, where
> it's out of context. The lambda functions allow you to specify the logic
> in-line so that the whole algorithm would be in one place.
>
> I understand the knee-jerk reaction to this new feature, but the C++
> community has been anxiously waiting for lambdas (closures) for a
> long time for a reason. The other languages (JavaScript, Python, Ruby,
> Haskell, heck even Perl has it) have had them for a long time.
> Lisp had them since, oh 1965?
>
>
>>
>> Well, perhaps that's not a quick way, but it will make programmers who
>> try to decipher C++ programs a lot more sane.
>
> I guess C++ does have a bad rep in this area. But the reason for that is
> that there was a wide-spread misconception that C++ is just C with classes.
> And a lot of C programmers (good and bad) tried to write C++ code with C
> mindset. You just can't do that.
>
> But I promise you that things will get much better, as C++ community has
> evolved since then and proper C++ techniques are much more wide-spread now.
> Reading a properly written C++ code is like watching a beautify painting.
> It's a work of art.
>
> But the bottom line is:
>
> PLEASE, don't make me chose between my favorite language and my favorite editor.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Andy.
>
> --
> You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
> Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
> For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
>
No one is forcing you to make a choice.
There MUST be a way to figure this out. I dunno however.
u can work it out after reading the syntax schema of c.vim.
I believe it's easy for you, because it's also a very very beautiful painting.
--
If the dream is BIG enough,the facts don't count!
--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
No comments:
Post a Comment