[Boost-users] Re: boost::switch?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-01 17:40:38

Bruce Trask <Bruce.Trask_at_[hidden]> writes:

> The syntax of the SWITCH I was referring to is the one on page 439 of
> Generative Programming. I.e.
>
<snip>
>
> with the usage syntax of 
>   SWITCH<ti, CASE<one, First, CASE<two, Second, CASE<three, Third> > >
>>::RET::func();
>
> Am I missing what you are saying here?

Where?

> My real code is a hair more complicated but even so,
> I guess this is the heart of my question and it stems from  page 62 of 
> C++ Template Metaprogramming section on Type Selection, where you and
> Aleksey talk about the alternative of using classes with mnemonic names
> versus ad hoc template specializations.
>
> So my question is, do you guys have a rule of thumb for going with ad
> hoc specializations versus using metafunctions with mnemonic names or is
> it just whether is reads better at the point of the call?

Personally, I do the latter, though ad hoc specializations will tend
towards being harder to read.  Sometimes I'm also trying to accomodate
broken compilers where partial specialization doesn't work, so I end
up avoiding them for that reason as well.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com