From: Emily Winch (emily_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-20 06:39:33
> > Yes, but WHY A MACRO?
> Ok, I agree in this case one can use super_subclass<T, U>::type (can > you
say "pretty ugly")...
Not half as ugly as ALL UPPERCASE :)
Here is an argument that might be relevant.
SUPER_SUBCLASS is essentially a function operating on types, that takes two
types and returns a type.
Functions are useful for all sorts of things including passing them to other
functions for evaluating later.
Making SUPER_SUBCLASS a macro would remove that option.
At the moment I can't think of a practical situation in which it would be
useful to pass super_subclass as a template template parameter, but it might
be worth keeping in mind. I'm already doing this with things like
boost::is_pointer, for my tuple filter iterator thing.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk