From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-24 09:14:26
David Abrahams wrote:
> Fully agreed and I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. There will be a
> small improvement in that distracting and irrelevant details like
> sizeof won't appear.
I'm inclined to worry that even though static_assert produces a prettier
message than BOOST_MPL_ASSERT, it will actually be less useful
because the error message doesn't contain information about the types
involved. At least, I don't see an easier way than to put the static_assert
in an auxiliary template.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk