From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-03 19:50:57
Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> Another data point: even though the above code compile with 8 and 7, in
> my real code I get a match failure on number<_,_,_,_,_,_,_,_>  or
> number<_,_,_,_,_,_,_> . As far as I can tell, the only difference
> between the working code and the non-working code is the additional
> template arguments to number<>, which are not used.
This is only a problem on GCC because of a compiler bug wrt template
template parameters. Proto reuses a work-around from the MPL, which is
conditioned on an MPL macro called BOOST_MPL_LIMIT_METAFUNCTION_ARITY.
If you define this to be at least as large as BOOST_PROTO_MAX_ARITY, the
problem goes away.
I've added some code to check for this condition and fail loudly at
Also, in another mail, you say:
> I'm really interested in having patterns with those many arguments, so once
> the variable controlling the maximum arity and the one controlling the maximum
> number of subpatterns in a pattern get decoupled I may be fine, but still
> giving a clear error message would be helpful.
Depending on what "number of subpatterns in a pattern" means, you may
already have what you want. There is a separate macro called
BOOST_PROTO_MAX_LOGICAL_ARITY which controls how many parameters
proto::or_ and proto::and_ accept. It is independent of
BOOST_PROTO_MAX_ARITY. For the time being, whether a pattern such as
number<_,_,_,_,_,_,_,_> is accepted is controlled by BOOST_PROTO_MAX_ARITY.
-- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
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