From: rogeeff (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-29 04:50:47
--- In boost_at_y..., "vesa_karvonen" <vesa_karvonen_at_h...> wrote:
> --- In boost_at_y..., "vesa_karvonen" <vesa_karvonen_at_h...> wrote:
> > --- In boost_at_y..., "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_r...> wrote:
> > > The particular thing I wanted to do seemed simple (to me): make
> > > list of all the built-in integral types, then generate
> > > specializations of a class template for T and T const&, where T
> > > are all members of the list. But, the docs for FOR_EACH seemed
> > > daunting, especially the recursion depth business. I'm running
> > > short of time, so I don't feel I can invest what's needed to
> > > figure all of this stuff out.
> > hmm... I'll add an example on something like this. This kind of
> > functionality is rather directly supported by the library.
> A simple example called "is_integral.cpp" has been committed. I'll
> revise it slightly a bit later. Hopefully it gets you started.
> By the way, the recursion depth business can often be ignored. It
> only important when you call other recursive functions inside a
> recursively implemented macro.
So this should give one solution for the problem that was discussed
recently. Is there any chance for MPL analog?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk