From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-19 18:16:59
vladimir josef sykora wrote:
> > Which is what is happening intuitively IMHO. I think the idea of
> > pre-defining cm and ALSO not polluting the global namespace with it
> > (si::abbreviation::cm) unless the client wants to is a nice
> > touch. I do agree that compile-time structs are probably best and
> > done via MPL strikes me as the right way to go.
> We were tempted to use boost::mpl::vector<> as the unit-typelist,
> and then use boost::mpl::at<> for accessing the members, but we
> decided not to for portability reasons (specially for Borland). The
> shock came afterwards when we realised that the ice(s) malfuntion on
> Borland and the type safety was gone - because of the unit's orders
> (ice) were not calculated correctly (we're still looking for a
> workaround -help!-). Anyway, it won't be difficult to switch to
> boost::mpl::vector<> to achieve cleaner code.
The version of MPL that came out with 1.29 release, and in particular
'vector' and 'at' components, does work with Borland, correctly ;). (At
least all the corresponding tests pass).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk