Dmitry Kakurin <dmitry.kakurin@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > We've had this theoretical (and IMHO pointless) discussion C vs. C++ > *in general*. > In no way I want to restart it. Then don't. > Just a very straight-forward usage of only 3 C++ features: > 1. Constructors > 2. Destructors > 3. Better syntax (ext_header.append_ext_header > vs. strbuf_append_ext_header(&ext_header, ) > > The generated code will be exactly the same. It won't. It will _do_ exactly the same (modulo the tenfold likelihood of compiler bugs) but hardly using the same code. > Yet the source code becomes more readable and MUCH less error > prone. How is this not a win? Because it is just your claim that this is more readable. > One (sensible) argument that I've heard in the previous discussion > was: you let a little bit of C++ in and then it gets more and more > complex and the code quality decreases. > This problem is solved by having "quality gates". > Again, *for Git* these quality gates already exist: only few people > have "commit access". > If/when somebody tries to be too fancy, what stops Junio from replying > "we don't use Library-X/C++-feature-Y in Git, please change your code > and resubmit" and throwing that fix away? Nothing. Well, what stops him from replying "we don't use C++ in Git, please change your code and resubmit"? -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
