Subject: [boost] Class-level instrospection
From: Joel Falcou (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-09 05:08:42
Daniel Walker a écrit :
> Why don't we both package what we have, upload to vault, and then
> work out merging the two and adding the rest in another thread?
I've cleaned-up my files and 'boostified' them so to speak.
I've uploaded a 'introspection.zip' on the vault so you can grab it and
we can start discussing this in a proper topic ;)
Basically i've uploaded the following :
Basically, the usage is really simple.
You want to check if classes provides a bool is_ok(long) method and you
want to catch both const and non-const variations :
BOOST_HAVE_MEMBER_FUNCTION(is_ok, bool(long) )
then the check itself is done via :
For BOOST_HAVE_DATA_MEMBER, my method can only check for public members.
So I added a macoer called BOOST_INSTROSPECTION_SUPPORT(C,V) that have
to be used in user-defined class C that want to publish a member named V
to our introspection mecanism.
has_member_data_mValue<foo>::value is false
has_member_data_mValue<bar>::value is true
Other limitations is that currently you can't have various check for a
method with a given name but different signature. I'm working on a fix
using PP sequence and :
In the same way, checking for suff like operator yields invalid class
name has_member_function_operator. So I propose we hand-code the
BOOST_HAS_SUBSCRIPT_OPERATOR( void(int) ) that builds a
has_subscript_operator<T> class. Other similar operator should be
handled the same way.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk