> And there's no simple excuse for the preprocessor; I don't know exactly why that exists, but my guess is that back in the 1970s it was an easy way to get at least an approximation to several desirable language features without having to complicate the actual compiler.
Clearly this guy has never had to deal with a large, complicated code base in C. Dismissing the preprocessor as a crutch for a weak compiler shows a significant ignorance about the useful capabilities that it brings.
Clearly this guy has never had to deal with a large, complicated code base in C. Dismissing the preprocessor as a crutch for a weak compiler shows a significant ignorance about the useful capabilities that it brings.