Re: [boost] Re: program options - generic validator

From: Neal D. Becker (nbecker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-23 08:27:21

On Friday 23 May 2003 08:04 am, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Hi Neal,
>
> Neal D. Becker wrote:
> > Why not a generic default validator?
>
> Good question! I think that I planned to define specialization for common
> types, like "int" and "float" in library sources, so that client code does
> not have to instantinate them. As it is now, there are only specialized
> version, not not generic one. Hmm.. that should be fixed.
>
> However, I must admit that I don't know how to declare primary template and
> then instantinate some of them in library source. I can't put explicit
> instantination in header. And if I put explicit specialization, then I'll
> have to write the body. Any suggestions?
>
> > BTW, I know "typeid (T).name()" doesn't really work, but I'm not sure
> > what would be better.
>
> For builtin types one can create a type trait which will return "good"
> name.
>

You know, this would make a handy addition as a seperate boost library 
element.