[boost] Re: [interfaces] Hand written interfaces

From: Johan Nilsson (johan.nilsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 03:59:27

"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:d0am2b$7hu$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Hi All,
>
> I'm working on ways to make the Boost Interfaces library easier to use. 
> This
> involves making interface definitions compile faster and making them 
> easier to
> read. Unfortunately, these are somewhat conflicting goals: really 
> messy-looking
> interface definitions may compile much faster than simple ones.
>
> I'm working on four approaches to interface definitions; I plan to 
> implement
> them all and then compare them. Right now I'm looking for feedback on 
> number 4:
>
> 1. The current IDL, possibly slightly modified, in which an interface 
> definition
> consists of a sequence of macro invocation
> 2. A modified IDL in which an interface definition consists of a single
> invocation; this increases the amount of preprocessor metaprogramming but
> decreases the amount of template metaprogramming
> 3. The pseudocode IDL, together with an IDL compiler which translates 
> pseudocode
> definitions into C++ class definitions requiring virtually no 
> metaprogramming.

I know you wanted feedback on #4, but please, please do not force upon us an 
IDL compiler. It complicates usage too much.

// Johan