From: Itay Maman (itay_maman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-21 12:11:34
"David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> From: "Itay Maman" <itay_maman_at_[hidden]>
> > > I realize that poses some problems for unification, since it's not
> > possible
> > > to non-intrusively customize constructors for a single class template.
> > > willing to discuss changes, if neccessary.
> > >
> > > -Dave
> > >
> > (i) Is it in the CVS?
> Yes: boost/python/extract.hpp
> > (ii) There's this MSVC namespace-related bug, which makes it impossible
> > use extract<T>(x). The workaround I have used so far, is to pass T as a
> > dummy parameter, i.e: extract(x, boost::type<T>());
> The class formulation doesn't suffer from that, but there's also a
> workaround for the function formulation...
> > I wonder if there are other workarounds which will not affect the
> > of the function?
> template <class T, class U>
> whatever extract(variant<U> const&, boost::type<T>* = 0);
This Practically creates two different interfaces: Code written for GCC (for
example) will not work under MSVC since all the
"extract<T>(x);" calls will not work. (I'd be glad to stand corrected if
this is not the case).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk