On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 12:29:25 -0700, Greg Colvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>At 12:11 PM 1/19/2003, David Abrahams wrote: > >>As interesting as this may be, the discussion of string literals as >>template parameters is off-topic for this group. Please either >>connect this discussion back to library design or take it elsewhere. > >Agreed. An interesting question is how to design around >the existing language to get the effect of having string >literals. Such attempts are often a good way to tell >whether and how the language might need to be extended. I agree too that the discussion is off-topic, of course. The reason why I often seize the opportunity to point out language limitations here is that many boosters are committee members too, and if limitations are recognized to be important for *real code*, then it is more likely that someone may bring up the issue in the committee itself. In particular, I'm under the impression that static processing of string-literals is an important area of meta-programming, for now ignored. If we had it I guess we would have already discovered important applications (just like it has happened with templates themselves, for which usages have been discovered far beyond the intent of their inventor(s)) Genny. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
