From: Daniel Frey (d.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-12 03:11:40
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> "Paul A Bristow" <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>>From a very quick study of this, this radical proposal avoids nasty
>>brackets "pi()" by adding a new C++ keyword implicit to make "pi" have
>>the same effect.
> Considering what Daniel can do, I don't think the math constant part of the
> proposal brings anything.
Basically, I agree. When I sorted out the VC-issues and finished the
documentation, I'll have a deeper look at the ICF-proposal and post some
comments to csc++. FWIW, my gut feeling is that the proposal it not
worth the trouble.
However: I can do many, but not all things proposed. There is one thing
(syntax) that I cannot do but that I like very much:
In my constant library, this is spelled 'pi.get<T>()'. Alternatives that
don't work: 'static_cast<T>(pi)', 'T(pi)', 'pi.operator T()'. If anyone
has a cool idea how this can be improved, let me know :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk