What the fuck is wrong with these people. Somebody makes an observation, expresses an opinion, POOF!

He''s the devil incarnate.

Perspective, people.

quote:Really??? I made the observation since I am learning templates and from what I have read looked like an easier way to code a function to accept many different data types.

And this is bad why?

What do you feel is the advantage of writing each function separately?

quote:I will 99% of time go with easier isn''t always better.

Why?

quote:So thats why I asked why is templates so great.

Because, amongst other things, they mean you don''t have to write the same function or class over and over and over again.

quote:I can see the need for operator overloading I kind of like them.

Templates are IMO one of the more important uses of ad hoc polymorphism. That is to say, templates transform operator overloading from being simply nice syntactic sugar into something genuinely useful and damn near irreplacable.

quote:They make sense and are not quite as generic. BTW never said I was a C++ expert.

So much is evident.

Tell you what, how about you start actually justifying your opinion?

You appear to think that their being for lazy programmers is a Bad Thing. Why?

You appear to think that a templated function will be slower than equivalent hand-written overloads. Why?

You appear to think that the easier a solution is, the more likely it is to be inferior. Why?

char a[99999],*p=a;int main(int c,char**V){char*v=c>0?1[V]:(char*)V;if(c>=0)for(;*v&&93!=*v;){62==*v&&++p||60==*v&&--p||43==*v&&++*p||45==*v&&--*p||44==*v&&(*p=getchar())||46==*v&&putchar(*p)||91==*v&&(*p&&main(0,(char**)(--v+2))||(v=(char*)main(-1,(char**)++v)-1));++v;}else for(c=1;c;c+=(91==*v)-(93==*v),++v);return(int)v;}  /*** drpizza@battleaxe.net ***/

For the Love All that is Good, do as Thumper''s says!
("If you don''t have anything nice to say, don''t say anything at all")

I didn''t find Mars'' original post presumptuous at all. He simply asked what templates are good for - seems reasonable to me.

In fact, let us dissect his message, with Asking Smart Questions in mind:
"After reading up on templates..."
He has asserted that he is making an effort to understand something new.

"...I have come to the conclusion that they are for lazy programmers."
If by accident, the young grass-hopp''r is most-wise.

"I don''t see the difference if you were to code a function to take explicit parameters vs. general parameters."
Note the emphasis ‘I don’t understand’. The conclusion is valid as well (*logic majors, please note the technical difference between valid and sound arguments.) – you can achieve the same results as template functions using explicit parameters and overloading. He''s begging the presentation of a useful template function.

"Just seems lazy and a faster way to whip up some code, and most likely its slower since it has to make up a new function for each type of data that is passed as a parameter."
Again, notice the non-declarative voice and uncertainty, this is an implied question.

"Unless someone can help me see the light I don''t see the need for templates in game programming."
Again, it is clear that he has not ''passed judgment'', and is asking for some help.

"Thanks"
Wow, even polite to boot!


...
Matt, I would be inclined to respond very similar to Cyberdrek to the way you did, but it would have involved a pearl and been considerably more vulgar. This is a good time to remind everyone (myself inclusive), that there are some women that visit the boards, young teenagers, and time-to-time even children. It''s probably best they don''t ever hear the pearl line (if you''re dying to know, send me email, but I don''t want any angry rants from parents or teachers about the filthy things their kids are learning on the Internet).
The period thing is a sensitive issue for many women... the sardonic nature is often overlooked and it''s viewed as a sexist remark.