From: Christian Holmquist (c.holmquist_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-15 03:55:40
> May I ask why, or in what situation? I am reminded of Item 2 of
> Meyers "Beware the Illusion of Container-Independent Code". .
-- I posted a trivial examle of writing a generic output stream operator for all container types.. It works for all containers given that their value_type also implements the stream operator. To me it is (was) an occuring task to overload container types, since I usually want algorithms or components to work out-of-the-box with containers. If I put some requirements on type T for my algorithm A, and I can express how A should behave if T is a container, then T::value_type must fulfill the requirement and I can specialize the the algorithm for this case. Mostly I provide specializations for boost::variant and boost::fusion sequences, but STL contains a too big set of containers to specialize each and every one. Does it make any sense? Regards, Christian On 15/05/07, Hervé Brönnimann <hervebronnimann_at_[hidden]> wrote: > > > On May 10, 2007, at 6:56 AM, Christian Holmquist wrote: > > I've had much use of a small traits class for identifying types > > that matches > > the STL Container concept (roughly) . > > May I ask why, or in what situation? I am reminded of Item 2 of > Meyers "Beware the Illusion of Container-Independent Code". . > -- > Hervé Brönnimann > CIS, Polytechnic University > _______________________________________________ > 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