On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Mateusz Loskot <[email protected]> wrote:
...snip...
> > With this code structure those who accept the default limitation get
> > fast compilation and those who want to tinker with the macro get more
> > flexibility at the price of longer compile.
> >
> > This also means some code duplication (same functionality implemented in
> > two different ways), so I'm not entirely sure if this is perfect. I will
> > therefore ask for opinion those who use this more heavily.
> >
> > So? Does this dual-implementation make sense?
>
> I'm fine with this solution.
>
> Jeff, Henning, are you happy with that too?
>
> Sure, that's fine. I would not that in the end we ended up gravitating to
from_base/to_base bindings for the most of the large tables -- this
ultimately seemed like the cleanest solution for our case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lotusphere 2011
Register now for Lotusphere 2011 and learn how
to connect the dots, take your collaborative environment
to the next level, and enter the era of Social Business.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/lotusphere-d2d
_______________________________________________
Soci-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
