From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-05 17:39:45
Thomas Witt <witt_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> I'm pretty proud of myself (;->)
> Rightfully so.
>> but I'm not too satisfied with how
>> much code is required for someone wanting to write a new function
>> accepting keyword arguments, and further I'm not sure how to design a
>> good interface for automatically generating the boilerplate with the
>> preprocessor. Consider that there may be initial non-keyword args,
>> which might themselves be templated or not.
>> I thought I'd open it up for suggestions. Thoughts, anyone?
> Can't the number of overloads needed be reduced by using default
> arguments of type nil? This should work as long as the positional
> arguments aren't non-const references.
I wish. Function template parameter types are not deducible from the
types of their defaults :(.
I wonder what it would take to get that changed?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk