[boost] Re: An alternative typeof macro

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-02 15:06:00

Daniel James <daniel_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
>> "Daniel James" <daniel_at_[hidden]> wrote
>> 
>>>Using mpl views might be better. Currently the implementation works by
>>>passing a list/vector to encode and adding to it. Instead encode could
>>>just return the sequence for it's sub-type, which can then be combined
>>>using mpl::joint_view, or similar.
>> Note that push_back<mpl::vector<...> > requires just one template
>> instantiation.  I am not sure why views are better.  And views definitely
>> don't provide constant-time lookup.
>
> I didn't mean to suggest that they're better in that regard. If the
> lookup time proves to be an obstacle, then the sequence can be copied
> into a mpl::vector, or Peder's compile time variables. The real
> advantage is losing the extra template parameter, which might not make
> much of a difference at all. But it might make the code a bit cleaner
> and more 'functional'.
>
> It's probably not worth your time looking into it. But I might have a
> go when you release your next version (so I'm not working against a
> moving target). And I'd like to wait for the new version of mpl.

Apparently it's already on the main trunk.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com