Boost logo

Boost :

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-04 17:14:29

Paul Mensonides wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Andrei
>>Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)
>>>And sometimes, I think, it's _the only_ way. If you are
>>>please take a look at in the boost
>>sandbox file vault.
>>The only way as long as you commit to not look outside C++.
> Which is the whole point from a library perspective. Relying on awk (or any
> other external tool) to write C++ isn't so bad, but relying on it to compile C++
> is unacceptable.

One does not rely on the preprocessor to compile C++. Andrei's argument
was that these tools can be used to create C++ code, not compile them.

However I would argue with Andrei ( you forgot Python among your tools
BTW ) that while these tools might be able to create C++ code, it is
currently far more difficult to use them to do that than it is to use
the C++ preprocessor, largely becaause of lack of code in these tools to
do so. Also, of course, you would need to convince the C++ standards
people that some other tool, as you mentioned, should be integrated into
the C++ compiler to replace the C++ preprocessor as a pre-compiler code
generator. Good luck !

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at