[boost] Re: Yet another Variant class

From: Andrei Alexandrescu (andrewalex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-29 14:50:15

"Itay Maman" <itay_maman_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:20020629192601.96137.qmail_at_web20706.mail.yahoo.com...
> What about the mpl::list? The compilation time (GCC
> 3.0.4) was a killer. I see these options:
>    (1) Offer a choice between mpl::list and
> Loki::typelist
>    (2) Use mpl::list only
>    (3) Add a Loki-like, reduced, typelist library to
> variant.hpp. The user will have the choice, with
> mpl::list being the default

It is my understanding that mpl does have a dot-style typelist. If
not, it should. Then, why wouldn't you use that? Ideally, the
dot-style typelist would be in a small header so you don't have to
#include the world to get the six lines of code that comprise the
dot-style typelist.

FWIW, little ad-hoc dot-typelists appear all over the place in various
boost libraries. Would be good to unify those. I think it would be
great to set politics aside and to include dot-typelists in boost.
They are a useful facility.

Andrei