Re: [boost] Re: ublas : size1 <-> nrows

From: Toon Knapen (toon.knapen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-24 06:26:00

jhrwalter wrote:

> --- In boost_at_y..., Toon Knapen <toon.knapen_at_s...> wrote:
> 
>>jhrwalter wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Basically, just use a function like this:
>>>>
>>>>  template<int N> ... size(Int<N>);
>>>>
>>>>Works in MSVC++ 6 and has neat syntax.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>How do you like the idea of using free functions like 
>>>
>>>template<class M, int N> 
>>>size_t size (const M &m, int<N>);
>>>
>>>for these operations instead?
>>>
>>
>>I would find it less intuitive.
>>
>>Would a free function be possible in MSVC, but a template member 
>>function would not ? (I'm not familiar with MSVC)
>>
>  
> On the long run I see two options: MSVC gets more standard conforming 
> or we'll have to consider dropping MSVC compatibility to use more 
> language features.
>  
> In the meantime free functions could be an easy way to achieve some 
> compromises.

OK.

But what I actually was asking was : are template members in general not 
possible with MSVC ? (I'm not familiar with MSVC ; I know, there's a lot 
of bandwidt on MSVC compatibility but I'm lucky to be able to skip all 
that at the moment)