Prev: Is there any standard/guarantees for exception safety in STL operations?
Next: outer class `this` in local classes without inheritance?
From: Martin B. on 26 Jul 2010 02:46
James Kanze wrote:
> On Jul 23, 1:02 pm, Walter Bright <newshou...(a)digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> Timothy Madden wrote:
>>> The main reasons I hear now against export are that it is not actively
>>> demanded (users always have the old inclusion model), that it is costly
>>> to implement, and that it has not been implemented.
>> There are a lot of things C++ could add with far less effort
>> that would be far more useful.
> For whom? Most of the places I've worked have simply banned
> templates in application level code, because of the necessity of
> putting the implementation in the header file. Are templates
> useful at the application level (as opposed to low level support
> libraries)? I don't know, but I know that some people claim
> that they are.
What does "application level code" mean in this context?
We write (simple) templated code from time to time in what I would
describe as application level code and I certainly cannot see any reason
for not doing it. Why is having to put the implementation in the header
a reason for a set of "Most places" to ban templates?
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]