Re: [boost] RE: Re: Re: Re: is_class

From: Daniel Frey (daniel.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-16 09:43:23

David Abrahams wrote:
> 
> Daniel Frey <d.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 04:58:42 +0100, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> >
> >> Daniel Frey wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Anyway, I would understand your frustration if you've proposed a drop-in
> >> replacement for the current 'is_class' implementation that  passes all
> >> the current tests and is better, in at least one way, than what we have
> >> now - and it was ignored. But that's not what happened, is it? If you
> >
> > I can't provide a drop-in replacement. I don't have all the compilers
> > needed.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > My "vision" is to do it step-by-step and with the help from others. I
> > neither have the time nor the amount of compilers needed to do everything
> > on my own and in one big step. Or are you suggesting that boost can only
> > be improved by people that have access to all compilers that boost
> > supports? Than I guess you rule out most of the boosters immediately.
> 
> I think this is a specious argument.  It's easy enough to avoid
> breaking an implementation by using #ifdefs to arrange that your
> changes only affect a range of compilers you've tested it against.

But I think that #ifdefs should only be the very last option. It is part
of the current problems as we already have too much #ifdefs which are
confusing. I think that the use of BOOST_WORKAROUND will improve the
situation, but I prefer to remove #ifdefs completely. See also the
discussion about a "general coding guideline" to "always provide a name
for template parameters". Here, the maintainer already did the right
thing when he received the patch. I think we should aim for removing as
many #ifdefs as possible. Maybe we can't do that in case of the
type-traits, but I would like to try it first before giving up and
creating yet another implementation that is guarded by #ifdef. (Which
then might no longer be an improvement).

Regards, Daniel

-- 
Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology
Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: [phone], fax: [phone]
eMail: daniel.frey_at_[hidden], web: http://www.aixigo.de