Jaap Suter wrote:
Nifty! You're using one of my favorite metaprogramming tricks, the
default template parameter which allows you to avoid creating a
separate implementation template. I almost forgot about that one,
it's been so long since I've been able to use it.
Funny you mention
Aleksey Gurtovoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Second thing: you can save yourself lots of typenames by taking
advantage of the way MPL lets you pass an uninstantiated metafunction,
without getting its nested ::type member, wherever a bool_c... is
expected:
Uhm, that's
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In short, my motivation for using 'typename's here is that I perceive the
'class' keyword as rather high-weight, semantically loaded, and prefer to
use it in its only original context - that is, for declaring/defining a
user-defined type that is more
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah. I have no problem with access protection where it prevents
unintentional misuse and improves
Perhaps it is a good idea to add those missing operators to
the MPL?
It is! They are not there only because you are the pioneer, here. The
followers will be very grateful :)
See other message.
It's not that frightening, but I understand :). I'll try to do something
about documenting the
Nifty! You're using one of my favorite metaprogramming tricks, the
default template parameter which allows you to avoid creating a
separate implementation template. I almost forgot about that one,
it's been so long since I've been able to use it.
Funny you mention that. I've been meaning to
Jaap Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nifty! You're using one of my favorite metaprogramming tricks, the
default template parameter which allows you to avoid creating a
separate implementation template. I almost forgot about that one,
it's been so long since I've been able to use it.
Funny
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jaap Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nifty! You're using one of my favorite metaprogramming tricks, the
default template parameter which allows you to avoid creating a
separate implementation template. I almost forgot
Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jaap Suter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nifty! You're using one of my favorite metaprogramming tricks, the
default template parameter which allows you to avoid creating a
David Abrahams wrote:
Lastly, I know that Aleksey will argue with me about this,
Yep, I will :).
but I have a strong preference for class rather than typename in
template
parameter lists. Aside from the fact that it's longer, typename is
visually confusable because it can mean other
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That doesn't do anything to reduce the confusability of the 'typename'
keyword for me, especially not in Jaap's example:
template
typename T
, typename T::X N
class foo;
No
- Original Message -
From: David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah. I have no problem with access protection where it prevents
unintentional misuse and improves overall code clarity. However, this
seems like it doesn't fit that bill.
Oh, it does IMHO. Once it is defined it can be
12 matches
Mail list logo
