<i>But that doesn't mean it is impossible to write trivial harmful metaprograms in CPP, as is easily demonstrated in my counter-example die_die_stupid_c_compiler.c</i><p>I'm slightly disappointed that<p><pre><code> gcc -E die_die_stupid_c_compiler.c
</code></pre>
didn't die, although it did produce about 750k of output, which is quite impressive...
"Like Perl, C++ is a swiss army chainsaw of a programming language. Unlike Perl, it's got all the blades simultaneously and permanently cast in a fixed half-open position. Don't turn it on."<p>Priceless.
Uhm, I find this post kind of uninspired. Did it really require experimental verification to show that meta-programming in C probably wasn't a good idea?<p>I find this sort of argument in general a bit straw-man-ish. They use a programming language for something it's not suited for and then reflect that back on the programming language.