Ron Parker wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jul 1999 16:09:31 -0700, "Jon A. Cruz"
> <jon### [at] geocitiescom> wrote:
>
> >Ron Parker wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 04 Jul 1999 17:17:33 -0400, Matt Giwer
> >> <mgi### [at] giwersworldorg> wrote:
> >>
> >> >       It is also a dangerous language that would permit what you want.
> >> >FORTH comes to mind.
> >>
> >> C and C++ come to mind too.  I couldn't live without varargs.
>
> >So, does your code have lots of GOTO's also? Functions named things like
> >"function1()" and "func2()"? Void pointers cast all over the place?   ;-)
>
> Nah.  But varargs is a thing that can't be done any other way.  I have
> this function called ODS that takes printf-style arguments, sprintf's
> into a buffer, and calls OutputDebugString.  I don't know of any other
> sane way to do that.  Streams are not considered sane, BTW.
>
> Well... actually... now you mention it, I do have lots of void
> pointers too.  Object-oriented programming has a purpose, but when it
> gets in the way, I find a different tool.

Ewwww! void pointers are Evil.
Of course, when programming for Windows, I am often forced to use them.   :-(

Let's try not to corrupt those poor, impressionable programmers out there.

Oh. That brings things back on topic. :-)  It could be used for things, but
then again there is great danger, so it's probably best to keep it out.

Post a reply to this message