Thanks for the responses to my question. My generic list formatting library
used the
const T const ref;
construct when passing values. This was because I had been looking at the
spirit library and read
T const ref;
as
T const ref;
I then interpreted that in the way pointers and const
On Thursday 17 April 2003 03:50 am, Vladimir Prus wrote:
IOW, now specifying behaviour for event requires creating a new class, with
event_filter typedef and operator(). You propose to pass lambda,
immediately on dfs_visitor creation. I think this is indeed convenient.
I've some concerns about
Reece Dunn wrote:
construct when passing values. This was because I had been looking at
the spirit library and read
T const ref;
as
T const ref;
To be clear, Spirit's convention is T const ref.
Cheers,
--
Joel de Guzman
joel at boost-consulting.com
http://www.boost-consulting.com
Douglas Gregor wrote:
On Thursday 17 April 2003 03:50 am, Vladimir Prus wrote:
IOW, now specifying behaviour for event requires creating a new class,
with event_filter typedef and operator(). You propose to pass lambda,
immediately on dfs_visitor creation. I think this is indeed convenient.
On Thursday 17 April 2003 10:04 am, Vladimir Prus wrote:
Douglas Gregor wrote:
The efficiency won't be any worse than using a bind object elsewhere in a
program. The do_on_XXX functions merely augment the visitor list of
dfs_visitor and return a new dfs_visitor object.
This precisely what
John Maddock wrote:
Yes, I made it gcc specific, also added a similar fix for is_union, but not
for has_trivial_copy which also produces these warnings. Fixes will be in
cvs towards the weekend - when I get my cvs access up again (I only have
limited mail access at present).
Looks good. That
Vladimir Prus wrote:
b) versioning at the class level
I implemented a binary serialisation library at my previous work place
that was very similar to what has been described here.
As for versioning, we left it up to the class. But implemented it in
all classes. All classes stored a version
John Maddock wrote:
Yes, I made it gcc specific, also added a similar fix for is_union, but not
Just looked at is_union. That won't work, I guess. You need to add a
typedef T cvt;
or change it to
BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT(bool, value = BOOST_IS_UNION(T));
Regards, Daniel
--
Daniel Frey
aixigo AG
James Curran wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
The intent is to get/change the part of leaf name after the first
dot.
um.. After the FIRST dot or the LAST dot.
In Win32, james.m.curran.txt the extention is txt, not
m.curran.txt
Note too that on Windows/NTFS, names like
Scott Maxwell wrote:
Hi All,
I have created a new shared_ptr class called shared_ptr_embedded.
This is based on the code for intrusive_ptr but differs in one
important
aspect. The struct/class pointed to is required to be derived from
shared_ptr_count. The latter class contains an 'int
Vladimir Prus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
While at the ACCU and committee meeting, Jeremy, Thomas and I did a
whole bunch of work on the sandbox version of iterator adaptors and
the new categories in boost/iterator and libs/iterator. We think that
the implementations are
Looking at
http://boost.sourceforge.net/regression-logs/cs-HP-UX-links.html#cast_test acc
you could say that aCC supports no member template keywords.
However, the code sample at the bottom compiles fine ?!
Nevertheless, I'd like to add the patches in attachment to take
the 53800 version of
:blat ???
1. I have no clue what that would mean
2. Is there any handling of :blat in any way shape or form in the file
system stuff? I don't remember seeing any description of that case...
Carl Daniel wrote:
James Curran wrote:
Vladimir Prus wrote:
The intent is to get/change the part
Jason House [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:blat ???
1. I have no clue what that would mean
2. Is there any handling of :blat in any way shape or form in the file
system stuff? I don't remember seeing any description of that case...
It means alternate stream of
Vladimir Prus wrote:
iii) requirement to pre-register classes to be saved as pointers
through a base class
Was it ever considered a problem. You surely have to register a class in
order to deserialize it (Java can create a class given its name, but we're
in C++).
I refering to the issue of
Terje Slettebø wrote:
Is there some way (using PP-lib, or whatever), to pass a template-id
with more than one parameter (thus, it contains at least one comma),
to a macro?
E.g.:
#define TEST(a) testa t;
TEST(std::pairchar,int) // Won't work
Maybe some sort of variation of
This is what intrusive_ptr is for. Just define intrusive_ptr_add_ref and
intrusive_ptr_release for your count class.
Unless I have missed something, intrusive_ptr has the following issues:
1. You must declare intrusive_ptr_add_ref and intrusive_ptr_release as
top-level functions that take a
Scott Maxwell wrote:
This is what intrusive_ptr is for. Just define intrusive_ptr_add_ref
and intrusive_ptr_release for your count class.
Unless I have missed something, intrusive_ptr has the following
issues:
1. You must declare intrusive_ptr_add_ref and intrusive_ptr_release as
top-level
From: Paul Mensonides [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Terje Slettebø wrote:
Is there some way (using PP-lib, or whatever), to pass a template-id
with more than one parameter (thus, it contains at least one comma),
to a macro?
E.g.:
#define TEST(a) testa t;
TEST(std::pairchar,int) // Won't
No, you only need to implement the addref/release functions for the base
class. See libs/smart_ptr/test/intrusive_ptr_test.cpp for an example.
A future boost release will probably contain such a base class. I didn't
want to introduce one at this time since it may have created confusion, as
1.29
We have been using this book on a course in programming language
foundations - and I strongly recommend it.
It is well written, the proofs are well explained and detailed (at least
in the beginning - later on he assumes that we are adept at structural
induction), the exercises are very helpful,
Terje Slettebø wrote:
MACRO( IN(2, (std::pairint, int)) )
I'm not sure how this latter solution could be used. How could MACRO
retrieve the type being passed?
You have to encode the type in a structure, and then decode it when you actually
need it:
#define IN(s, x) (s) x
#define OUT(type)
22 matches
Mail list logo
