Boost logo

Boost :

From: Bruno Lalande (bruno.lalande_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-14 04:50:01


Hi,

> So, we can envision two different tacks to take with this point concept.
> One is to make one point concept for all types of points (2D, 3D,
> homogeneous points, 11D simplified string theory points, etc.) or we can
> have a separate concept for each conceptual type of point and separate
> traits classes for each. We can have inheritance between concepts, 3D
> point could inherit from 2D point concept, for instance.

I'd be inclined to prefer the first solution, because I just don't see
any advantage in the second one. Do you have some strong arguments in
favor of the second approach?

> Having free
> functions and meta functions instead of traits might lead us in the
> direction of good design, but I don't think it is a prerequisite. Good
> OO design is probably achievable.

Yep I agree, I think we must consider metafunctions and free function
not as a goal or proof of good design but as a more powerful tool that
we can use if things go too complicated. Anyway, I'll give it a try to
compare the resulting code, on library side and (most important) on
user side.

Regards
Bruno


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk