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