Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-01 09:37:16

Peder Holt <peder.holt_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On 9/1/05, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> > Ah. But the fact remains that remove_pointer et al. are indeed broken on
>> > VC6 and VC7, and the regression tests bear this out.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > IMO, the best path is to preserve the meaning of
>> > PTS. That is, it still defines full specializations of the type traits
>> > templates. But the typeof implementation should be what the primary
>> > template uses for compilers without PTS. That way, everything that is
>> > working now, keeps working with no change in performance.
>> I think it would better to do some actual speed testing there. After
>> all, using the typeof hack *could* turn out to be much faster and use
>> fewer resources than doing it the other way.
>> It's a pretty easy test.
> I don't think using the typeof library directly is the best idea. When
> using typeof, you represent each type by a number, limiting you to
> ~1000 types.

I hope that's false, but in any case, you've completely missed the
point. There's a bugfeature in vc <= 7.1 that allows typeof to be
implemented without any such limitation. No numerical representation
is ever generated.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

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