Follow-up Comment #17, bug #64018 (project groff):
[comment #15 comment #15:]
> I regret that the implementation language makes _groff_ so stinky for
people. Having seen the problems it was solving, I can understand why Clark
selected it over the just-born ANSI C. It's much closer to applications
programming than systems programming, and C++ had much promise there. Of
course Stroustrup promoted as the best language for everything. :-/
>
> From today's perspective, in _groff_ there are huge amounts of
data-structure walking code that could be replaced by C++98 "algorithms" (they
_are_, but God the name assaults the nose like a bottle of brogrammer
patchouli oil), or cleanly replaced by C++11 idioms.
>
> I get the feeling that Clark ended up not doing as much input validation as
he might simply because it was so incredibly tedious to walk data structures.
>
> Here's a recent example of some validation I added, with annotations of
future possibilities.
>
> bool is_family_valid(const char *fam)
> {
> // std::vector<const char *> styles{"R", "I", "B", "BI"}; // C++11
> const size_t nstyles = 4;
> const char *st[nstyles] = { "R", "I", "B", "BI" };
> std::vector<const char *> styles(st, (st + nstyles));
> // for (auto style : styles) // C++11
> std::vector<const char *>::iterator style;
> for (style = styles.begin(); style != styles.end(); style++)
> if (!check_font(fam, *style))
> return false;
> return true;
> }
>
> C++11 would cut this function about in half. Of course, the whole thing is
pure bloat from an Annotated Reference Manual C++ perspective, where'd you
skip all this ridiculous validation entirely because what could go wrong? The
ARPAnet is such a friendly place...
>
Wow! You can cut that in half in C.
#define lengthof(a) (sizeof(a) / sizeof((a)[0]))
bool is_family_valid(const char *fam)
{
static const char st[][3] = { "R", "I", "B", "BI" };
for (size_t i = 0; i < lengthof(st); i++) {
if (!check_font(fam, st[i]))
return false;
}
return true;
}
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64018>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
