Boost logo

Boost :

From: Daniel Spangenberg (dsp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-22 06:35:03

Hello Daniel,

Daniel Frey schrieb:

> Stephen Nutt wrote:
> > Thank Daniel. I hadn't thought about not using the BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT,
> > but using enums directly. Makes a BIG improvement. I'll update when I've
> > made the changes, and some others I have in mind. (BTW, uses a little over
> > half the memory in half the time when used with another change I made!)
> Good, I'm looking forward to the new version. The question remains how
> to handle compilers that can't use enums - the
> BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT-macro is not provided for fun AFAIK ;)

Are you sure, that BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT should also handle situations
where compilers cannot handle in-class-definitions of enums's? In this case I
that the name BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT is not the correct one and I would
suggest to introduce one further macro, like BOOST_ENUM_VALUE or something
similar to that for that purpose.

Btw: Which compiler cannot handle enums in classes? Just a question of interest.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at