Jaap Suter wrote:
Actually, I was planning on bringing the content of arithmetic,
logic and comparison directories to boost/mpl root (still
preserving the corresponding composite headers). In that light,
I would suggest putting the new headers directly into the root
directory as well.
Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| From: Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| What I find confusing about the current rule is that it makes an
| exception for integral type const static data member. I think the old
| rule was less irregular.
|
| (Strangely enought, for long time
Jaap Suter wrote:
So I tried to come up with the actual smallest example that
doesn't compile, even
with the LAMBDA_SUPPORT macro. It looks as follows:
template class T
struct meta_fun_1
{
typedef mpl::integral_c typename T::value_type, 0 type;
BOOST_MPL_AUX_LAMBDA_SUPPORT( 1,
Hi,
I would second the approach below. If I can get to
the native error code, then I can use FormatMessage()
or strerror() to get to the platform error message,
localised if necessary. I am not so interested in
the name of the function throwing the exception - I
tend to use a logger with a
Hi,
I just uploaded here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/utf/ a
new version of the UTF library. The changes are:
1) Added missing typename keywords and used BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME in
every applicable place
2) Added safety checks on buffer size. (Thanks to Dietmar Kuehl)
3) Now the
I've been looking through some real code to see where we pactically could
benefit from MPL and think I've found a nice one :
If one wants to integrate generic programming inside a strong OO designed
program, you might want to try to downcast a pointer to a base-class to all
possible
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 18:26:54 -0800, Paul Mensonides
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah. However, this doesn't really apply to what I'm talking about with:
enum { a, b, c };
Yes, for linkage purposes 'enum xyz { }' is equivalent to 'typedef enum { }
xyz'.
Well, is the enum below unnamed? Is the
On 12 Jan 2003 10:49:09 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe that that sentence may have been in the first printings of
TC++PL3 [at the time, I got the third printing, which someone managed
to steel :-(]
Here are his words:
Rene, how can I get the aCC compile to work (it's reporting Missing the
whole time as you can see)
Likely options:
1) the HP results aren't being filtered through process_jam_log.
2) you ran out of disk space and the targets weren't built.
3) some other bjam invocation problem.
Can you post
On the yahoo groups, i followed some discussions about a possible boost serialization
library
i followed them with great interest because im also working on a serialization library
for what its worth (im not a boost developer), these are some thoughts about
serialization:
1) Serialization is
Hello everybody:
I'm studying the mpl right now,and was confused by so many many many
template ,can anybody
give me a suggestion about how can I get the very template matched
result?
Does cl.exe or icl.exe or g++.exe have some switch to produce the file
contain the
template
some more arguments to loosely couple serialization and reflection:
- a reflection and serialisation library can be used to implement a remote method
invocation (RMI) library.
- one could imagine a kind of debugging tool, or class browser tool using only
reflection and not serialisation
best
Ares Lagae wrote:
generates the describe method automatically. There is no need to add aditional (non
static) class members, because reflection
inherently is about classes, and not about class methods.
class instances i mean
___
Unsubscribe other
Ares Lagae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On the yahoo groups, i followed some discussions about
a possible boost serialization library i followed them
with great interest because im also working on a
serialization library for what its worth (im not a
boost developer), these are some thoughts
Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's an interesting turn-of-the-tables: I was experimenting with
using SFINAE to disable conversion operators, and I discovered that
almost every compiler except vc6/7 rejects
Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is this well-formed:
struct X {
typedef void func_t(int);
func_t member;
};
void X::member(int) {
return;
}
What about:
struct X {
typedef void func_t(int) const;
// ^
func_t member;
};
Toon Knapen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've been looking through some real code to see where we pactically could
benefit from MPL and think I've found a nice one :
If one wants to integrate generic programming inside a strong OO designed
program, you might want to try to downcast a pointer
Ares Lagae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
I really don't agree with that part. Deserializing objects without
default constructors is just one example of something you can't do
easily just because you have reflection. Furthermore, any class with
decent encapsulation (e.g.
Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 12 Jan 2003 10:49:09 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| I believe that that sentence may have been in the first printings of
| TC++PL3 [at the time, I got the third printing, which someone managed
| to steel :-(]
|
| Here are his
If you're willing to intrude on the design of Foo, there are much
cleaner solutions using friend. However, non-intrusive serialization
should generally be possible even for classes which are
well-encapsulated.
ok (i'm just making suggestions for the sake of discussion here)
suppose we do
Ares Lagae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you're willing to intrude on the design of Foo, there are much
cleaner solutions using friend. However, non-intrusive serialization
should generally be possible even for classes which are
well-encapsulated.
ok (i'm just making suggestions for the
Thorsten Ottosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I just try include boost/multi_array.hpp I get these errors:
Comeau C/C++ 4.3.0.1 (Aug 21 2002 15:45:32) for MS_WINDOWS_x86
Copyright 1988-2002 Comeau Computing. All rights reserved.
MODE:strict warnings C++
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Thorsten Ottosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I just try include boost/multi_array.hpp I get these errors:
Comeau C/C++ 4.3.0.1 (Aug 21 2002 15:45:32) for MS_WINDOWS_x86
Copyright 1988-2002
Thorsten Ottosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Thorsten Ottosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I just try include boost/multi_array.hpp I get these errors:
Comeau C/C++ 4.3.0.1 (Aug 21 2002
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In other words, the void parameter list is fundamentally different
than
type void.
That's not a very good test case, though. *Matching* a void parameter
could easily be different from generating one. What about:
- Original Message -
From: Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I can't tell what EDG thinks it is, but whatever it is, it's not a
function type.
EDG treats it like a special type of function type. For instance, trying
to
apply const to it yields a applying const to a function-type
From: Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's an interesting turn-of-the-tables: I was experimenting with
using SFINAE to disable conversion operators, and I discovered that
almost every compiler except vc6/7 rejects this code:
template
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd prefer it if matching void in a parameter list *were* different
from generating one. The above prevents the use of SFINAE to generate
restricted templated conversion operators.
Dave, what exactly are you trying to
Thorsten Ottosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
yep. it needs a _big_ bunch of 'this-' to compile. Is Comeau really
wrong?
No, the code is wrong.
ok..could you explain what the difference is then, betweeen this-shape()
and shape()???
Two-phase name lookup. shape, by itself is a
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The latter. It was just an experiment. Fortunately, nothing I'm
doing depends very much on it. It was prompted by the fact that
Borland 5.51 can handle enable_if, but not in a templated constructor:
template class T
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
template class T
struct X
{
template class U
X(XU const, typename enable_ifsome_property_ofU::value,
int*::type = 0);
^
It chokes here?
Sorry, no. I mean the 2nd '' in that line.
Okay.
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 22:38:06 +0100, Terje Slettebø
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In other words, the void parameter list is fundamentally different than
type void.
It appears this is right. 8.3.5/2 says: [...] If the
parameter-declaration-clause is empty, the
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 00:59:21 +0100, Gennaro Prota
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In some old newsgroup post, searched through Google a while ago, I
also read that the committee rejected a proposal to allow the
generalized form f(T) with T=void
Maybe it's worth noting, as well, that then generalizing
Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I didn't know that this was legal:
templateclass T struct identity {
typedef T type;
};
templateclass T void func(const T, typename identityT::type* = 0);
int main() {
func(10);
return 0;
}
Sure, T is deducible due to the first
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 01:16:07 +0100, Gennaro Prota
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe it's worth noting, as well, that then generalizing things a bit
something like:
template typename T1, typename T2, typename T3
int f(T1 t1, T2 t2, T3 t3);
becomes a generator of variadic functions with a
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I didn't know that this was legal:
templateclass T struct identity {
typedef T type;
};
templateclass T void func(const T, typename identityT::type* = 0);
int main() {
func(10);
return 0;
}
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cool, I learn something every day. I assume, though, that if I
attempted to
actually use the second parameter it would become non-deducable, right?
No, as long as identityT::type* matches the type of the parameter
you
- Original Message -
From: Vincent Finn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had a look at the mailing list but it comes up as read-only for me for
some reason?
I am logged in to Source Forge but haven't used it much
as for the news group I subscribed to it (it appears in the list of
available
At 05:15 PM 1/10/2003, William E. Kempf wrote:
... what() // from std::runtime_error. Implementation provides
// a very explicit message, including who(), path1(),
// path2(), and message reported by O/S (which is
// subject to
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:34:51 -0500, David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The latter. It was just an experiment. Fortunately, nothing I'm
doing depends very much on it. It was prompted by the fact that
Borland 5.51 can handle enable_if, but not in a templated constructor:
template class T
Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:34:51 -0500, David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The latter. It was just an experiment. Fortunately, nothing I'm
doing depends very much on it. It was prompted by the fact that
Borland 5.51 can handle enable_if, but not in a
thank you for your reply ,but¡¡¡¡what is Wiki ?
The best way to learn the MPL is to read the Wiki, the paper, and
then ask questions here. Aleksey is pretty good about helping out.
Dave
___
Unsubscribe other changes:
Provided I add the neccessary prelude (below), that compiles fine for
me on vc7. Don't you need to instantiate these to see the error?
Yes, that's true. That's what I did in my own code of course.
using std::size_t;
Seeing this, I'm wondering what the boost policy on the use of size_t is.
thank you for your reply ,but¡¡¡¡what is Wiki ?
http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Effective_MPL
HTH
Jape
___
Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Jaap Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
using std::size_t;
Seeing this, I'm wondering what the boost policy on the use of size_t is.
I'm using it all over the place, and treating it as a built-in. I'm neither
including anything or using a namespace. Is this wrong?
Yes. size_t is defined in
Jaap Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Seriously though, I had some funny problems with MSVC. For example, I got
the following error on some lines:
syntax error : ''
That's right, there is nothing in between the quotes. Turns out the
following doesn't work on MSVC, in some cases:
Why not do it and post a patch here?
done.
That's not a patch; those are the complete files. However, I'm sure
Ron can work with those. If he doesn't respond in the next week,
Bjorn (the maintenance wizard) will get on his case.
So what is a patch?
regards
Thorsten
From: Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Gennaro Prota [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In some old newsgroup post, searched through Google a while ago, I
also read that the committee rejected a proposal to allow the
generalized form f(T) with T=void, but I've never read the proposal
itself (I
48 matches
Mail list logo
