Re: [boost] BOOST_FOREACH review results

From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-05 07:27:38

In-Reply-To: <d5c6jf$2bm$1_at_[hidden]>
gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden] (Gennadiy Rozental) wrote (abridged):
> The only two negative reviews based their rejection on principle:
> "Macros are evil and so should not be used". While this maybe
> interesting point in itself, as I see things now, boost practice
> supports using macros where necessary and macro nature of the tool
> could not be a compelling enough reason to reject the submission. 

For the record, my review was negative and was not based on that 
principle. I agree with the boost policy of using macros where necessary.

I rejected it because it is an overly complex solution to a simple 
non-problem.

>    While there were not so many specific issues discovered during 
> review, I would like to list couple:

What about the name? Shouldn't it be "BOOST_FOR_EACH"?

-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.