RE: [boost] Re: New MPL meta-functions, and a question

2003-01-12 Thread Aleksey Gurtovoy
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 > > d

Re: [boost] Re: New MPL meta-functions, and a question

2003-01-04 Thread David Abrahams
Terje Slettebø <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> "Jaap Suter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> > Mm, I still don't quite understand. Consider the following function: >> > >> > void foo( int_c< 0 > ); >> > >> > Shouldn't the following code: >> > >> >

Re: [boost] Re: New MPL meta-functions, and a question

2003-01-04 Thread Terje Slettebø
>From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "Jaap Suter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Mm, I still don't quite understand. Consider the following function: > > > > void foo( int_c< 0 > ); > > > > Shouldn't the following code: > > > > foo( int_c< minus< int_c< 4 >, int_c< 4 > >::type

Re: [boost] Re: New MPL meta-functions, and a question

2003-01-04 Thread David Abrahams
"Jaap Suter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Is it possible that (under certain conditions) the following line: >> > >> > SNIP >> > >> > has a different type than this one: >> > >> > SNIP >> >> Uhm, in fact, these are always different: > > Mm, I still don't quite understand. Consider the followin