On 10 August 2010 18:56, Eric Niebler <e...@boostpro.com> wrote: > On 8/10/2010 12:03 PM, Thomas Heller wrote: >> And we are potentially able to reduce error message if SFINAE is >> applied more often, with the disadvantage of losing information on >> what failed. > > I disagree about SFINAE. I think it leads to horrible error messages > like, "No function overload matched. Here are the signatures of the (5, > 20, 100+) functions that failed to match (and I'm not going to tell you > why)". I've had better luck with tag dispatching, with a catch-all > handler that asserts with a "if-you-get-here-it-means-this" message.
SFINAE plus static_assert gives pretty *clear* error messages imho! (if you don't pay attention to the junk that follows the failed assertion at least) _______________________________________________ proto mailing list proto@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/proto
