Re: [boost] RTTI

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-12-10 16:01:14

I'm not sure; Kevlin?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Powell" <powellg_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:07 PM
Subject: RE: [boost] RTTI

> Last I looked "any" used typeid, should it be using your "fix"?
> I.e. if I store a X const, should I be able to retrieve a X volatile? (Or
> have I missed something in "any"
>
>   -Yours,
> -gary-
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:david.abrahams_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 2:39 PM
> To: boost
> Subject: [boost] RTTI
>
>
> Today I discovered (to my horror) that the following are all supposed to
be
> identical:
>
> typeid(X)
> typeid(X const)
> typeid(X volatile)
> typeid(X const volatile)
> typeid(X&)
> typeid(X const&)
> typeid(X volatile&)
> typeid(X const volatile&)
>
> This happened when one of my compilers turned out to be conforming in this
> regard, and after spending quite a while trying to track the "bug" down, I
> bothered to look in the standard
> ;-)
>
> Since I needed all of the information to be there at runtime, I
implemented
> my own function
>
>     template <class T>
>     type_id_t type_id();
>
> which returns a unique type_id_t value for every T.
>
> These objects currently support everything implied by
> boost::totally_ordered<type_id_t> from the operators library, and I also
> wrote a stream inserter. This is going to be part of Boost.Python, but if
> there is any interest, I'll be happy to submit it as a separate library
> component. Oh, also: to implement it I needed is_reference_to_const<T> and
> is_reference_to_volatile<T>, which I have got working without partial
> specialization (thanks Mat Markus!) These could go into type_traits if
> desired.
>
>
> Info: http://www.boost.org  Send unsubscribe requests to:
<mailto:boost-unsubscribe_at_[hidden]>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>