>  Well, I find the first example easier to read (after proper indentation)
> because I see much faster with a quick scan which names are from the
> standard C++ library and which are local variables or reserved keywords.

Sure, I know that already, but not everyone else shares your view.

>  You might as well argue that all the ';' symbols are "noise in the code"
> which add nothing and make it more difficult to read and write (after all,
> the example would be completely unambiguous and parseable without them).

There are several differences with ";".  It's only one character long, 
usually only appears 0 or 1 times on a line, and *often* gives you useful 
information.  On the contrary, "std::" is 5 characters long, often appears 
many times on one line, and very *rarely* helps to actually disambiguate any 
code.

>  I have never, and will never understand some people's infatuation with
> brevity.

As I said before, it makes the code easier and faster *for me* to read, and 
saves *me* time.  I understand how you feel and how you prefer the extra 
verbosity, but it's pretty shortsighted to say you don't understand other 
views when it's been explained to you 100 times.

Post a reply to this message