Boost logo

Boost :

From: Paul Mensonides (pmenso57_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-29 21:19:30

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Arkadiy Vertleyb

> Hi,
> The typeof library defines a macro, REGISTER_TEMPLATE, that
> is intended for use by the library users. Once people
> started using the library, they eventually wanted to use this
> macro inside the Boost PP looping constructs, such as
> SEQ_FOR_EACH, etc.
> Since the implementation of REGISTER_TEMPLATE itself uses
> quite a few looping constructs, people ran into re-entrancy issues.

Which looping constructs does it use?

> I would like the users to be able to use the macro with
> whichever looping construct they prefer, and, AFAIU, the
> easiast (only?) way to achieve this would be to limit the
> macro implementation to only use automatically re-entrant
> macros, such as BOOST_PP_REPEAT.

That depends. If you can (re)specify the implementation in terms of only one
"recursion state" (such as 'z' for REPEAT), then it is best to provide both:

#define REGISTER(...) REGISTER_Z(DEDUCE_Z(), ...)
#define REGISTER_Z(z, ...) // ...

If the implementation requires (or is significantly better using) multiple
states, then, yes, you should have it do everything automatically.

> Is this the right way to go for this particular case, and
> generally for any macro that is in the library interface?

That's the general answer. The pp-lib fails to provide a unifying way to deal
with recursion, which is why these problems pop up from time to time.

Paul Mensonides

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