"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d76nnh$17di$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Derek Parnell" <derek@psych.ward> wrote in message news:xz4xopc9utmh$.1ocjw4mimo341.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Tue, 24 May 2005 08:30:41 +1000, Matthew wrote:
>> >    for(memory_database::const_iterator ri = db.begin(); ri !=
>> > db.end(); ++ri) // Loop over the records
>> >    {
>> >        record    r(*ri);
>> >
>> >        std::cout << r.comment() << std::endl;
>> >
>> >        for(record::const_iterator fi = r.begin(); fi !=
>> > r.end();
>> > ++fi) // Loop over the fields
>> >       {
>> >            field f(*fi);
>> >
>> >            std::cout << f.name() << "= '" << f.value() << "'"
>> > <<
>> > std::endl;
>> >        }
>> >        std::cout << std::endl;
>> >    }
>> >
>> > And I'd respectfully suggest that it would be churlish to
>> > suggest
>> > that that's not easy to read.
>>
>>
>> LOL!!! I be churlish then.
>
> Perhaps it's my age, but I have never found any of the C++
> iostreams' use of
> << and >> to be easy to read in any manner. The same goes for the
> < and > of
> C++ templates. My brain just parses them as shift and comparison
> operators,
> and refuses to change :-)

While I share your general detestation of the IOStreams, I do see them as 'normal', and don't aesthetically object to the chevrons. Rather it's that they overload a mathematical operation, which means they're plain stupid.

As for templates, I'm afraid I have completely the opposite perspective/reaction wrt C++ tempaltes vs D templates.