From: Fernando Cacciola (fcacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-27 10:22:54
----- Original Message -----
From: Vesa Karvonen <vesa.karvonen_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 12:07 PM
Subject: [boost] "Strict" type traits
> Several type traits currently require special support from the user or the
> compiler. [I think that this is highly undesirable for several reasons.]
> traits include (with some special cases) at least:
> In the case that a particular trait is not specialized, the current type
> traits implementation typically return false, which can typically be
> considered safe.
> However, in some cases, the user may really want to know the real answer
> is willing to write the specializations whenever an unknown type is found.
> Perhaps the user makes use of traits for specializing algorithms or
> interfacing with other languages and likes to make sure that everything
> as intended.
> Possible solutions:
> - Core language support.
> - Strict traits that would fail or return "probably_false" whenever they
> not make a definite answer:
> - Separately implemented negative traits, which can be cross checked with
> positive traits:
Off the top of my head I would vote for negative traits and double checking.
At least, that's what I've been doing and it worked well so far.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk