Re: [boost] Re: compile time member detection

From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-23 08:30:52

Brian McNamara <lorgon_at_[hidden]> writes:

[...]

| > I think I need arguments other than that is how Haskell do it.
| 
| I agree that "how language X does it" does not mean that C++ ought to do
| it the same way.  (As you have pointed out, C++ is rather different from
| most other languages in a variety of important respects.)
| 
| On the other hand, I do think it is useful to consider how other
| languages have done something, as it may provide useful insight into
| how to solve the problem.

I agree.  Thta is a reason wy we found the comparative study done by
Garcia et al. very useful. 

[...]

| order to make an informed decision.  In lieu of that experience,
| however, I do think it's useful to do some of the type of debating we're
| doing here (about theoretical merit/demerits of various approaches, what
| other languages have done, etc.).

Yes. And it is instructive to read other people's opinions on the
issue. I just wanted to make sure that the design criteria are kept in
the fore.  It might be that the criteria are impossible to satisfy at
the same time, but I think they should not be forgotten.  Probably, we
may end up with cutting down the list of criteria but we need to start
somewhere :-)

-- Gaby