Boost logo

Boost :

From: Chris Smith (smitty_one_each_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-07 20:58:04


David Abrahams wrote:
> "David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>
>>"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>news:ud66jde56.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
>>
>>>[...]
>>>Careful, Dave. In general, metaprogramming doesn't need to use
>>>types as its underlying computation mechanism.
>>
>>Right. C++ could allow mutable values at compile time to enable
>>metaprogramming, whilst leaving the types immutable.
>>
>>
>>>[...]
>>>In fact, I predict that if support for concepts is built into C++ we will
>>>eventually run out of rope even for the things we do today with TMP
>>>and we will *need* a new approach. I sure hope that approach
>>>can look more like regular C++ programming than TMP does.
>>
>>Why wait? Maybe we should start designing a new approach right
>>now. ;>
>
>
> I hope to work with Daveed Vandevoorde on his metacode effort at some
> point.
>

Is it such a bug that TMP does not "look more like regular C++ programming"?
I submit that some visual distinction is helpful (while not endorsing
the current baroque stylings) for grasping when stuff is happening while
reading the code.
Best,
Chris


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk