[LAD] Looking for an introduction to rt programming with a gui

[torbenh]

On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 10:55:48PM +0200, fons at kokkinizita.net wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 08:44:42PM +0100, Chris Cannam wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 9:41 AM, torbenh <torbenh at gmx.de> wrote:
> > > but i find the equivalen c++ easier to read.
> > > assuming we have a proper modern c++ osc lib:
> > >
> > > boost::unique_future<OscMsg>
> > > osc_recv (OscPeer peer, std::string path)
> > > {
> > >        boost::shared_ptr< boost::promise<OscMsg> > spromise( new boost::promise<OscMsg> )
> > >        peer.add_handler( path, [=]( OscMsg msg )
> > >        {
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Is this C++0xthingy?
> > 
> > I have to say this combination of Boost plus Weird Stuff From The
> > Future is no more readable to me (as a long-time C++ programmer) than
> > the Clojure example.  It looks neat, but I'm pretty sure it's
> > accessible to you only because it's what you've spent the time with
> > recently.
> 
> I find this sort of thing absolutely beyond comprehension.
> 
> It's impossible to understand without knowing the boost::
> abstractions, templates and god knows what else.
> 
> IMNSHO, the way any software works should be understandable by
> a) knowing the language, b) reading the code, at least up to the
> point that the reader can have an good idea of the big picture,
> of data structures and control flow, only excluding application
> domain specific details which require special expertise anyway.
> 
> If libraries are used to somehow extend the language rather for
> encapsulating application domain specific algorithms, the net
> result is code that is utterly unreadable to anyone who happens
> not to use the same libraries. This is true for libs such as STL
> and to a larger degree, boost.
> 
> Again IMNSHO, a programming language should be used 'as is',
> without trying to extend it or introduce concepts that are
> not part of it ('shared_ptr', 'promise' (whatever that means),
> 'spromise' (whatever that means), etc.). All the rest is just
> obfusciation, and useful only to some niche of 'believers'.

the code is c++0x, which gcc-4.5 already handles.
i just used the boost stuff, because i hadnt noticed
that the promise future stuff is already in gcc-4.5 std:: namesapace.

shared_ptr is a std:: since gcc-4.3
basically the gcc guys are a bit slow with moving stuff thats already in
boost into the std namespace, since thats not really important.

and i really consider STL part of C++
so this is usage of c++0x "as is" 

you might argue that its not set in stone yet, and *could* change a bit.
but its currently implemented. and the changes would be really small.

-- 
torben Hohn