From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-12 02:37:54
Daryle Walker wrote:
> My question is: why do we make the user explicitly add the
> "="? What's
> wrong with (excuse any line-wrap my e-mail client adds):
A counter question - what's wrong with '='? You either have to write ',' or
'=', and IMO '=' is much more appropriate here.
> there some subtle point of macro definitions that keeps this
> from working,
> or did we make a silly oversight?
It's not an oversight, it's the explicit choice; before I wrote the original
BOOST_MPL_STATIC_CONSTANT macro that was a prototype of the one Dave later
added to 'config.hpp', I was experimenting with both forms, and I found '='
form to be more explicit and natural. As Dave already mentioned, it matches
the "ideal" declaration of static member constant, and often it's more
> If it was an oversight,
> can we change the
> macro to this form?
If the only reason for the change asked is personal aesthetic preferences, I
am against it. IMO the questioned using of '=' is well justified and using
of ',' is not, so please leave it as is.
> Yes, I know that I'm asking for an
> incompatible change,
> but the macro is only a few days old, so I don't think that
> there's too much
> code to change.
First, IMO there are no reasons for the change, and there are reasons
against it. Second, the macro in its final form was added to 'config.hpp'
about 4 weeks ago, and personally I've been using its prototype for more
than 2 months. For me there are more important things to do in spare time
than making quite a number of code changes that are not justified at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk