Eric, that was great explanation. Now, everything makes sense. Thanks. :)
--- On Mon, 28/2/11, Eric Niebler <e...@boostpro.com> wrote:
> From: Eric Niebler <e...@boostpro.com>
> Subject: Re: [proto] invalid use of incomplete type 'detail::uncvref<...>'
> To: email@example.com
> Date: Monday, 28 February, 2011, 20:26
> On 3/1/2011 3:15 AM, Hossein Haeri
> > Hi Eric,
> >> boost/proto/matches.hpp:391:13: error: invalid use
> of incomplete
> >> type 'struct
> >> mpl_::integral_c<int, 2> > >::type'
> Now look at how you've defined
> >> CanBeCalled:
> >> template<typename Fun, typename Int> struct
> > Thanks. I added another specialisation for
> mpl::integral_c<int, n> >
> > and it worked. But, now I'm wondering why on earth was
> that basically
> > needed? I had never touched mpl::integral_c in my code
> snippet. That
> > should have been generated by Proto then, right?
> > And, in that case,
> > may I please know why?
> Somewhere in your code you're adding two MPL integers.
> That's just how
> MPL works. Your code is assuming a particular type of
> Integral Constant
> (mpl::int_). MPL only promises to give you /a/ MPL Integral
> > On the other hand, I'm wondering why GCC never nagged
> about the need
> > for mpl::integral_c<int, 1> when I wrote:
> > EW1<InpPool, GameState, AmmoMsg>() >>
> > In other words, why is mpl::int_<n> used for the
> above line (when n
> > == 1), whereas mpl::integral_c<int, n> is used
> for the following one
> > (when n == 2)?
> > (EW1<InpPool, GameState, AmmoMsg>() ||
> EW1<InpPool, GameState,
> > AmmoMsg>()) >> Plus2();
> Probably because the former isn't doing an addition of MPL
> This is an MPL "gotcha". Others have complained about it on
> the boost
> list, IIRC.
> Eric Niebler
> BoostPro Computing
> proto mailing list
proto mailing list