From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-30 22:42:55
Hi Fredrik and Dave,
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Fredrik Blomqvist" <fredrik_blomqvist_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > Hi!
> > Looks good! I believe this is a highly needed complement to generic
> > A question though: Have you considered using separated-traits instead?
> > for example the new iterator_traits code by David Abrahams)
> > Like so:
> > container_value<C>::type;
> > container_reference<C>::type;
> > container_difference<C>::type;
> > etc ....
> > Philosofically I'd say this would be more in-line with the Open Closed
> > Principle. (and IIRC David Abrahams also raised the idea of refactoring
> > boost::call_traits into separate traits-classes a while ago.)
> Yes, it's important to do it that way for many reasons, not least of
> which is MPL interoperability.
would it be a sin to have both?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk