From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-08-29 11:51:16
On Wednesday 29 August 2001 09:42, you wrote:
> --- In boost_at_y..., Douglas Gregor <gregod_at_c...> wrote:
> > One problem with such an approach is that it can very quickly become
> > unwieldy.
> Do you want to say it makes no sense to make a static assert,
> or do you want to say it makes no sense to make the algorithm
> working for all Euclidian rings?
It makes sense to make the algorithm work at its natural level of
abstraction. If a Euclidean ring is the algebraic structure on which the
algorithm is defined, then it should work for all Euclidean rings.
Additionally, I think it does make sense to use a static assert in this case,
especially because a Euclidean ring is a sufficiently rich algebraic
structure that not all algebraic types conform to.
What I'm saying is that the
approach can get very unweildy. If I have a type Foo that models a Euclidean
ring, I don't want to specialize extensible traits for the tags:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk