From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-29 15:59:47
Peter Dimov wrote:
>> Peter Dimov wrote:
>>> Eric Niebler:
>>>> I think the better solution is the one Arkadiy suggested ... that there
>>>> is a dedicated place for such registrations so interested parties can
>>>> add them if they need them.
>>> The various registrations are indeed the responsibility of the library
>>> authors but they will probably not happen unless it is possible to make
>>> registrations without including a foreign header and in a risk-free
>> Peter, I'm not exactly sure what you're arguing for here. Can you be
>> more specific?
> I think I'm arguing for a documented registration interface that looks like
> namespace boost
> namespace type_of
> template< class V, class T > struct encode_type;
> template<> struct encode_type< whatever-is-required >
> } // namespace type_of
> } // namespace boost
> I've no idea how practical is that.
I'm confused. There already is a documented registration interface
(involving macros). The question is where to put the registrations.
Consider that if I consume library X and need X::Y to be registered, I
could put the registration in my code, but if everybody did that it
would be chaos.
Have I misunderstood your suggestion?
-- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk