From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-18 10:21:14
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrei Alexandrescu" <andrewalex_at_[hidden]>
> "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> All right, so that's /compiler's/ problem. Is this implying that newer
> compilers will render at least parts of MPL obsolete?
Sure, as with many of our libraries, if you drop support for broken
compilers, parts of the implementation can also be dropped.
> > Also, I don't think that simple traversals of 50 element lists
> > begins to describe the potential complexity of metaprograms. When
> > start designing new domain-specific languages, it's easy to create
> > scenarios where a lot of non-trivial processing happens.
> I believe that that processing can be performed with reasonable
> efficiency. Again, there are languages that foster the same
> computation model, with which you can do very complex tasks with
> reasonable efficiency.
Absolutely agreed. As I said before, most of these template engines
weren't designed with metaprogramming in mind.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk