From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-30 21:25:57
"Paul Mensonides" <pmenso57_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> ** and which I'm not sure is even addressing a real-world problem. It
>> might be; I am just not sure.
> It is not something that can't be worked around, but it is a
> nuisance. Basically, you have to expand a macro to produce a
> comma--but do it only at the last possible step so it doesn't go
> through any other macros. The problem is not that so much. Rather,
> it implies that you have to pass everything else as such an
> "invocable" entity--which is annoying at best.
I was talking about the "macro scoping" feature currently under
consideration in the LWG, not Vesa's proposal.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk