Re: [boost] Technical session at the October C++ meeting?

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-15 10:36:19

I agree that type_traits is extremely useful and should be considered for
standardization.

That said, it is only used as an /implementation detail/ of other boost
libraries. There is no reason a vendor couldn't implement any of the boost
library interfaces without using boost::type_traits (except that it would be
a lot of work). From a standardization POV, I don't see how library
implementation dependencies are relevant to which libraries are considered
first.

-Dave

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Siek" <jsiek_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Technical session at the October C++ meeting?

> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Howard Hinnant wrote:
> hinnan>
> hinnan> I would like to see the type_traits lib submitted (I have an
obvious
> hinnan> bias on that one).  I believe it is both independent, and that
other
> hinnan> libs will depend on it (though I'm not sure which ones).  This one
may
> hinnan> also have some core issues (is_union?).
>
> Off the top of my head I can think of at least three boost libraries that
> already use type traits. I agree that it should be one of the first
> libraries to be considered.
>
> Cheers,
> Jeremy
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Jeremy Siek                        http://php.indiana.edu/~jsiek/
>  Ph.D. Candidate, IU B'ton          email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
>  Summer Manager, AT&T Research      phone: [phone]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Unsubscribe:
<mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>