What's better about Ruby than Python?

[David Abrahams]

"Neil Hodgson" <nhodgson at bigpond.net.au> writes:

> David Abrahams:
>
>> BTW, the C++ preprocessor is a fairly weak macro system.  A higher
>> level metaprogramming facility that knows more about the underlying
>> language could be a lot cleaner, clearer, safer, and more expressive.
>
>    What do you think of OpenC++?
> http://www.csg.is.titech.ac.jp/~chiba/openc++.html

I think it's an interesting idea that hasn't been developed much in a
long time.  The Synopsis (http://synopsis.sf.net) guys have been
maintaining their own fork just so they could process Boost code
correctly - I like and use Synopsis Personally, I think GCC_XML has
more promise than OC++ because the correctness and performance of its
front-end is tied to a real compiler which sees a *lot* of use.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com