From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-04 09:37:47
At 07:55 AM 3/4/2001 -0600, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
>Jeremy Siek wrote:
>> Another variation on the named template parameters.
>> Instead of using :: to separate the parameters, we stick with the more
>> traditional comma. This requires some "type wrapper" classes,
>> each with a
>> name corresponding to the template parameter.
>> boost::iterator_adaptor<int*, default_iterator_policies,
>> Category<std::input_iterator_tag>, Reference<int>
>That's pretty nice. However, IMO there is one disadvantage here - users
>the library will have either to prefix parameters' names with (at least)
>'boost::', so it becomes a little bit clumsy:
It seems named template parameters is a really interesting research topic,
but one that is still evolving.
So shouldn't we wait until the research is further, and consensus emerges,
before actually using NTP's in boost code?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk