On Sun, 09 Mar 2003 09:11:05 -0500, David Abrahams
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2003 15:31:58 -0500, David Abrahams
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Make 'em MPL-compatible metafunctions."
>> ^^^
>> |---- which ones?
>
>All of the traits. For example:
>
>template <class T>
>struct const_min
> : integral_c<T, /* calculate the value */>
>{};
Well, why hardcoding that dependency? At most I would see the mpl
versions *in addition* to the ordinary ones. Of course, the former can
be constructed upon the latter by the user
template <typename T>
struct mpl_const_min :
integral_c<T, const_min<T> :: value > {};
and everyone pays only for what he/she uses.
>> PS: why the quotes? :-)
>
>I couldn't resist (?)
I still don't understand... it must be one of those C++ programmers
eccentricities ;-)
Genny.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
