Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-26 14:38:17

"Daniel Frey" <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 10:59 AM 1/26/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
> >Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >
> >>And I use __typeof__, which I don't know
> >
> >I haven't been paying too much attention, but I sure hope we don't
> >have a [proposed] boost library which relies on the presence of
> >nonstandard language extensions (__typeof__) for its operation
> Particularly since the C++ committee hasn't agreed on final specs
> __typeof__, or whatever it ends up being called. The specs may
> quite a bit before a final vote is taken. This isn't a case of some
> compiler vendors just being slow to implement something the
> has already blessed.
> Dave's choice of the word "relies" is a key point. Lots of Boost
> libraries make use of nonstandard compiler extensions if available,
> have useful fallbacks if the extension isn't available. Thus they
> rely on the extension for correct operation.

Hm, I could ask the user to specify the result type of each operator
call for some types T and U for all platforms/compilers that don't
support __typeof__. Is that what you had in mind?

There's always this:

I've never found it helpful when I really wanted to use typeof,


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