From: Alexander Nasonov (alnsn-mycop_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-29 07:34:50
Alexander Nasonov wrote:
>> Alternatively, you can implement MPL conformant sequence
>> tuple_sequence<Tuple>. It's not so hard as you can imagine.
>> (Question to MPL's authors: when it will be documented?).
David Abrahams wrote:
> Sequence requirements are already documented:
Yes, you're right, I was able to write *immutable* sequence using only the
documentation but I had to look at MPL code to see how extensible sequences
are implemented. After all, I decided to specialize push_front, pop_front,
push_back and pop_back for function_arguments. And I asked primarely about
documenting it (or may be there is a better way?).
> That's not (I think) what Alexander had in mind: IIUC he was talking
> about a wrapper over tuples such that:
> is an MPL sequence. Of course, a better solution would be to
> specialize begin/end so that any Boost tuple is *itself* an MPL
That would be great.
-- Alexander Nasonov Remove minus and all between minus and at from my e-mail for timely response
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk