search for: crosscut

decry convect piccolo serif serviette ethan jeannie crosscut cacti backplane elisabeth advocacy ethanol heine precession syncopate bait terror

...1::functions could help with that in any i/o redesign. > > What you're talking about is developing a new C++ I/O library, > > which is > > certainly a worthy goal, but one I'm not being paid to achieve. :) > > Fair enough. Again, if a group (not just from llvm but crosscutting the C++ community) got together to design a new I/O system I'd be all for it. But I think iostreams gets a worse rap than it really deserves. Yes, there are things in there that makes a modern C++ engineer cringe, but the basic concepts are sound. Some implementations are better than ot...

...portal? Maybe some experienced users could give some hints on where the advantages of Ruby and Rails are for this case. One thing I imagined was, that developing application pieces - we call them "modules" - will be easier to implement since Ruby gives something like built-in static crosscutting through mix-ins. Are there any experiences with unexperienced Java developers using Ruby? Or is it just a matter of taste, and I''m better off with sticking to the Java solution? Best regards Gregor Melhorn -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

>>> 1. The static constructor contortions in place to handle the >>> extremely >>> unlikely case of a static object constructor writing to one of the >>> standard streams. >> >> I also dislike this strongly, but it isn't really related. > > Isn't this the motivation behind "#include <iostreams> is hereby >