|
Boost : |
From: Daniel Frey (d.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-14 14:47:43
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 15:49:05 +0200, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
> The proposal is for several header files each containing the same
> constants, only one of which would be used for any compilation. (Users
> have been warned against using more than one! Nobody has suggested a way
> to guard against this mistake, but I think that it would be apparent
> pretty soon, probably at compile time, and at link time if not.) The
> macros constants header is the simplest and could be used to provide the
> appropiate value(s) above.
The difference IMHO is, that this is not a generic approach. It's a bit
like replacing templates with macros. I haven't seen any convincing
arguments against the code I showed, which *is* generic IMHO, but as I
don't have the background of the "long saga" you mentioned, I think I'm
not the right one to say what's the best way to go.
Regards, Daniel
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk