Re: [boost] [MPL] naming question

From: Terje Slettebø (tslettebo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-04 15:40:48

>From: "Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]>

> > With it, you might have used:
> >
> > template<>
> > struct plus<default_type, default_type>
> > {
> >   template<class T1, class T2, class T3, class T4, class T5>
> >   struct apply { ... }
> >
> >   template<class Sequence>
> >   struct apply { ... }
> > };
> >
>
> Yes, except that I don't want to place a burden of supporting both forms
on
> a metafunction author. It's 'apply_tuple' that is supposed to take care of
> arguments unfolding and passing them on, separately, to the metafunction
> being invoked.

Yes, that makes sense.

> > And what about partial specialisation of function templates?
>
> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2001/n1295.htm

Thanks. :) Come to think of it, I think I've read that proposal earlier.

Regards,

Terje