Boost logo

Boost :

From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-06 06:02:41

Jaap Suter wrote:
> I am using a clean Boost 1.28 distribution downloaded from
> over
> which I installed the full library + all its dependencies that I
> downloaded from
> I hope that is the latest 'stable' release. If not, where can
> I find that one? I'm a little hesitant to dive into CVS myself.
> I prefer nicely packaged zip files that work right away :).

I am working on the new revision of the library that fixes a couple of bugs
and takes into account most of the review comments, but currently the above
archive is the latest public release.


> I'd like to make the following remarks:
> 1. The file boost/mpl/contains.hpp contains a bug in my
> distribution. It includes "boost/mpl/logical_not.hpp" whereas
> that should be "boost/mpl/logical/not.hpp".

Thanks for the report, fixed in local sources.

> 2. What happened to mpl::for_each and mpl::push_back? Did I
> overlook them?

'mpl::push_back' is there, it's just that currently there is no container
that implements it ;). It's gonna be fixed in the release version.

As for 'for_each' - if you mean 'for_each' function template
(, it's present
as well - see "boost/mpl/for_each.hpp".

> 3. Is there any chance on a mpl::set container? I made my own
> push_back that checks whether an element already exists, and
> does nothing in that case. But I am sure more people could use
> an mpl::set.

You can wait until I get to it, or you are welcome to contribute :).

> 4. In my humble opinion (no offense to any of you) but the
> documentation can definitely be improved.



> - Where is the reference documentation for mpl::if_,
> mpl::apply_if, lambda facilities, etc? There is more in the mpl
> than the reference describes.

Yep, will be fixed in the release version.

> - I'd like a better explanation and more examples of both the
> fold/algorithm stuff, and the lambda facilities.

Working on it.

> - Why does the mini-tutorial only talk about compile-time if's?

The same here :).


> 5. I highly recommend adding a default unsigned_int_c to the
> library. I am using integral_c< size_t, n > very often.

Hmm, 'mpl::integral_c<std::size_t,n>' is indeed a little bit too verbose;
I'll consider adding 'mpl::size_t_c<>' (mpl::size_t<>?).


> All in all, great work!

Thanks for your feedback!


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at