Re: [boost] Macros at namespace scope: trailing semicolon?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-16 07:57:40

"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> FWIW, one of the main reasons I brought this issue up was that I
>> was hoping you'd convince me that the reasons to do it your way were
>> important enough to outweigh the reasons to go the other way.
>
> If you let people add a semicolon after the macro, how can you change the 
> macro later in a way that doesn't tolerate a trailing semicolon? The 
> expansion of the macro is an implementation detail; the interface shouldn't 
> depend on a particular expansion.
>
> Right? 

I agree; that's the first argument I find truly compelling.  All the
other ones, including the arguments I started with, seem a bit weak by
comparison.

Thank you.

I am still hesitating though, because the macros in question aren't
really an abstraction: the library is designed to be usable without
the macros (in case you don't like them or whatever), and the library
documents exactly what they generate.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com