From: Peder Holt (peder.holt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-19 06:36:56
On 1/19/06, Andy Little <andy_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> "Arkadiy Vertleyb" wrote
> > "Andy Little" wrote
> >> if there is a large number of
> >> specialisations it will eventually have a noticeable effect on compilation
> >> times.
> > According to "C++ template metaprogramming" (C.3.5) though, this effect can
> > be ignored.
> Ok I would still argue against registering evrything at once just for reasons of
> tidiness. OK I appreciate that its much more work though, so my 2nd choice would
> be to go for the 2nd approach where a common named file is included to register
> all the types for a library:
> 1 personal 'thing' for minimising macros
> 2 its easier to catch errors in a file name than #ifdef X
> 3 Its slightly more work figuring out the correct macro name than one common
> file name
> 4 Single file approach easier to manage as all registrations are in one place.
> Has the third approach using a macro got any advantages over file inclusion
> (2nd) approach?
Personally, I don't like the 2nd approach, as it introduces include
<boost/a_lib/a_component.hpp> must be included prior to including
Creating a header called my_includes.hpp that contains:
and in my_program.cpp including
gives a different behaviour from
>From my perspective, this is unacceptable.
> Andy Little
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk