Re: [boost] Re: MPL containers and algorithms

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-11 17:06:13

From: "Paul Mensonides" <pmenso57_at_[hidden]>

> The STL analogy applies specifically to sequences.  I don't mean that the
MPL
> has stuff that the STL doesn't or vice-versa.  I mean that the
fundamental
> premise of the STL analogy is flawed with regard to sequences because the
actual
> reasons for that abstraction in the STL do not apply to template
> metaprogramming.  The only thing that you really get out of it is
syntactic
> sugar and limited similarity to STL code--which is not nearly as strong
of an
> argument as you tend to make it (IMHO). :)

I don't know why you keep ignoring these two points:

1. You get the ability to operate on subsequences with the same algorithms
2. You get the ability to operate on typelist-style structures from
different libraries (e.g. Loki typelists, the types of a boost::tuple.

Even if you don't buy the need for different sequences, the plain fact is
that different sequences exist. It can be useful to be able to interoperate
with them.

-----------------------------------------------------------
           David Abrahams * Boost Consulting
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com