Re: [boost] ScopeExit Review Announcement

From: Kim Barrett (kab_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-09 13:25:03

At 4:24 PM +0000 8/9/07, Alexander Nasonov wrote:
>  > My only (mild) quibble is the decision to use a PP sequence for the
>>  arguments. I might prefer that this library be forward looking and
>>  assume variadic macros, with backward compatibility variants that use
>>  the PP sequence technique for use by those who need to support
>>  compilers that don't support variadic macros.
>
>How would you implement dispatching if there is only one argument? E.g.
>BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT(i) vs. BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT( (i) ).
>AFAIK, there is no equivalent to mpl::is_sequence in PP.

I wouldn't. When I said "backward compatibility variants" I meant
macros with different names, with the "good" names used by the variadic
versions. So something like BOOST_SCOPE_EXIT_PPSEQ (with no preference
intended for that specific naming convention).