Re: [boost] Pretty Good Initialization Library

From: Mattias Flodin (flodin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-08 19:58:30

Quoting "Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website for Email)" <andrewalex_at_[hidden]>:
> Unfortunately, the discussion does not flow the way I had hoped :o). My
> intent is to figure out the opinion of the boost community about the advice
> against overloading the comma, and, and or operators, given by people like
> Scott Meyers and others. Is that a good coding standard or not?

Another question I find equally, if not more interesting is: did anybody here
run into any real problems due to the comma operator being overloaded in this
way?

I haven't, but I never used libraries like Blitz++ in any big projects. Although
most of Scott Meyers' advice is very reasonable, I sometimes find that his
books lack references to real projects where the problems he mentions surfaced.
Is it educated guesses or real experience?

Here's a wager: The majority of C++ programmers are not aware that the
evaluation order of function arguments is implementation-defined. Now if this
is true, and they get along OK anyway, couldn't they also get along with the
quirky evaluation rules for the comma operator?

My answer to your poll would be d) Not always an invalid coding standard, and in
the case of the initialization library it is valid until proven otherwise.

/Mattias