From: Pavol Droba (droba_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-04 17:22:43
I understand your reasons now, although it is only partialy due to this
Separated traits are most probably a best presentation layer for the
There was a great effort put into in the current implementation to
make it work on defficient compilers. Workarounds are easier to
implement using monolitic approach. This is probably also major reason
why I was supporting it.
I would suggest to define the new interface, and implement it on
top of the current one for now.
On Sat, Oct 04, 2003 at 03:47:03PM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
> Sorry, I find that argument unconvincing. You can easily factor out
> common parts into separate metafunctions. I'm going to stop arguing
> about this now; if I haven't convinced _you_ by now, I doubt anything
> will. Let me just close by saying that "decoupled is better than
> coupled" is a well established principle, and its sad that we (me
> included) seem to have to keep relearning that lesson by making the
> same mistakes. I'm just thankful Fredrik spotted this instance of the
> mistake, and I hope you and Thorsten will respond accordingly.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk