Re: [boost] [config] RFC PR 82

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] RFC PR 82
From: Domagoj Šarić (dsaritz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-12-01 01:16:25

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 07:43:24 +0530, Agustín K-ballo Bergé
<kaballo86_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> As for the original topic, I am certain that having the proposed macro  
> would be a mistake. Don't try to fool a language/compiler smarter than  
> you, or you will end up getting what you asked for (UB) sooner or later.  
> If you have types whose values are comprised by just a set of bits, and  
> you'd wish to operate on said value representation, then do so by using  
> the tools for operating on the value representation of such trivial  
> types. Type punning via unions is not that tool.

IMNHO that's just generic paranoia and refusing to even look outside the
box...we'd still be using C++98 with this kind of thinking (e.g.
Boost.Move is 'fooling' the pre-C++11 compiler just like templates weren't
originally designed as a tool for TMP or CRTP)...
Not to mention that various compilers explicitly prescribe ways to be
'fooled' (union type punning for GCC&compatibles, MSVC does not use the
aliasing rules at all - Windows wouldn't boot if it did, etc...)

-- 
"What Huxley teaches is that in the age of advanced technology, spiritual
devastation is more likely to come from an enemy with a smiling face than  
 from one whose countenance exudes suspicion and hate."
Neil Postman
---
Ova e-pošta je provjerena na viruse Avast protuvirusnim programom.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus