From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-04 22:10:34
"Iain K. Hanson" <ikh_at_[hidden]> wrote
> On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 09:30:19PM -0400, Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
> > And template metaprogramming is just template hackery, correct?
> No! No! No! now we have type saftey,
Boost PP doesnt compromise type safety...
Agreed, but we can and do approximate them with prefixes...
> overload sets, dynamic &
> static polymorphism,
We can have polymorphism if we want, see my post sometime ago:
http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg79530.php. We do use this
technique in our BOOST_TYPEOF proposal.
> metafunctions, and metafunction classes rtc.etc.etc.
Things change. New techniques get discovered. What used to be "ugly
macros" now becomes quite elegant and _very_ useful mechanism, that can be
used to achieve things that otherwise ***just cannot be achieved***, and
_especially_ if you use macros in the library interface. Why should we
throw this away?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk