Abominable Function Types (C++)

Personally I spent enough time writing Python to acquire significant coding OCD about things like whitespace, file/directory layout, documentation. When I write C++ I have two prime directives: 1, keep it compulsively tight and legible; 2, use the idioms of C++ to sort out other peoples’ APIs (as opposed to reinventing wheels). I stick to these rules like they’re a diet, it is easy to let your mind wander and find that you’ve spent half the day writing a framework instead of solving your problem; metaphorically this is the equivalent of forgetting to go to the gym and then ordering pizza for dinner. Along these lines I give myself one premature optimization a week, like as a cheat.

I find it is most productive when you are using C++ “against” something. For example I just wrote a bunch of templates that eliminate like 90% of the requisite API boilerplate the Python C API calls for – that was simultaneously satisfying in both the “I totally solved that specific problem” and “dogg check out this clever snippet I wrote” senses of ‘satisfying’. Contrastingly, the last time I created a class hierarchy it was a sprawling regrettable mess – I am more “structure-oriented”, versus “object-oriented”, but still.

    #include "ostream"
    namespace std {
    basic_ostream cout;
    ios_base::Init x0;
    }
    int main() { std::cout << "Hello"; }

http://blog.regehr.org/archives/1278

Wren is a cool language :-)

> This paper tries to shed some light in the dark corners, and explores whether the language can be cleaned up so that good template documentation does not drag obscure language-lawyer details into the domain of the regular user.

To be fair, the author does mention this is not for civilians ...

With "using", you can define an empty/illegal/abominable function looking like a pointer to function (usually done with a "typedef").