From: Eric Friedman (ebf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-02 21:18:13
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> > > 5. Usage std::type_info for reflection
> > > I don't think we should enforce RTTI for the variant users. We should
> > > be able to postpone the decision on what kind of reflection
> > > information user want till instantiation time.
> > Please elaborate on this point. FYI, the current variant::type method
> > is provided so as to mirror boost::any.
> Take a look on recent discussion on lexical type modifications. Here I
> express my concern about RTTI affecting the performance of whole
> application. Apparently I was not able to find enough confederates to
> justify an efforts of making RTTI optional part of interface.
> But still the same applies to Variant library. Presence of typeinfo
> header rules out it's usage for me (I will probably need to hack into your
> code and eliminate all the references to type_info locally, would I decide
> to use it)
If the issue concerns you this much, you might propose something along the
lines of BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS.
That is, you might try: "BOOST_NO_RTTI anyone?"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk