Re: [boost] Checked Integral Class

From: Matt Doyle (mdoyle_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-16 15:34:58

> 
> Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> > 
> > In my opinion both approaches have their uses, just like 
> std::vector and 
> > boost::array.
> > 
> 
> Right. We could support both ways by making the type of range 
> the value
> is checked against configurable. I think of a static_range<> for
> compile-time checked values and dynamic_ranges to be setup at runtime.

Question though. Which is going to be more useable; having separate methods for static and runtime, or having one that checks the range at compile time and then continues to maintain that original policy for the lifetime of the type?

Actually, that might be something that be selectable in the policy class, if it's possible, something like
        apply_contraints_at [COMPILE_TIME, RUN_TIME, BOTH]

Any thoughts?

Matt

Scanned by Fortigate {X3BTB534}