From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-16 04:17:25
Paul Mensonides wrote:
> I see no problem with adding the functionality, but the macros still cannot
> safely be made public. On other compilers (besides Borland), their use causes
> stability problems. Using something like the above doesn't help (it would
> actually be slightly worse) because of the reliance on intermediates in the
> argument--which requires that expansion order proceed as it should (which is not
> the case on some preprocessors).
That's a shame. I find it very useful.
>>Also, with a full working BOOST_PP_IS_UNARY, I
>>think it should be possible to make BOOST_PP_SEQ_NIL act as
>>an empty sequence, if I write a patch to do that would it be accepted?
> It is already possible because the identifier is known.
I should have realised that, since that's how lists work.
> Lack of a nil sequences
> (until we get placemarkers) was a conscience decision. An important property of
> sequences is the ability to directly append. By definition, if A and B are both
> sequences, then A B is also a sequence.
That makes sense. I guess my version isn't that useful then. But, it's a
nice trick and I can use it in my own stuff, which will probably never
work on preprocessors where BOOST_PP_IS_UNARY is unstable.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk