Subject: Re: [boost] Single letter template type causes errors in compile of program_options and filesystem boost libraries
From: Mike Collier (mcollier69_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-18 20:22:42
Thanks for the insights and ideas. I looked at units and mpl. They
look like something I could use if I was writing my own code dealing
with units. I'll have to think about the wrapper script idea and using
#undef and see if it may work in my case.
On Dec 18, 2008, at 3:15 PM, OvermindDL1 wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 4:02 PM, John Phillips
> <phillips_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> OvermindDL1 wrote:
>>> And here is the Boost.MPL page of exactly that kind of example; it
>>> would give them their self-documentation, as well as being typesafe,
>>> as well as helping to make sure the programmer cannot screw up and
>>> start multiplying things together that they should not do and so
>>> (would throw a compile error, you know, instead of their internal
>>> logic silently breaking down):
>> If he wants to include units, he could avoid writing his own using
>> MPL, and
>> instead use the already existing boost units library.
> ...I never noticed that there before. When I update it is usually
> only because of a library or two, and I had been using an MPL
> homegrown version in one of my apps since boost 1.34. I may have to
> convert some of my code to Boost.Units if it support multi-dimensional
> positions, could remove a few rather large headers that way...
> I was not saying he should use it (I doubt that the library headers
> would change it anyway), I was just using it as an example of a proper
> way to signify types, rather then using empty macros that can conflict
> with a huge amount of code, thus showing that what Boost is doing is
> correct, and what that header is doing is horribly wrong.
> 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