Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Convert+Boost.Parameter
From: Emil Dotchevski (emildotchevski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-22 16:11:34
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 12:39 PM, <Vladimir.Batov_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > The keywords are decoupled.
> > ...
> > Did you read through the Boost.Parameter tutorial?
> OK, I admit before I only glanced over the docs a couple of times. I
> thought I got the idea. Obviously not. :-( Now I printed it out and set
> down reading. Now I see the registration is all by itself and not coupled
> with anything. That's good.
> So, convert() can take those parameters in. Given we do not know how many
> parameters there might be I'd suggest we set those parameters with
> operator(). Like
> convert<string, int>(str)(default_ = -1)(throw_ =
> false)(some_other_parameter_ = ...)
> Given, convert() does not know and does not understand
> "some_other_parameter_" somebody else will need to do something with it.
> Who would that be and what would it do? I presume we could come up with a
> Boost.Parameter-based manipulator analog... or... no, I admit I am out of
> ideas. How can all that work?
It would be nice if a function (for example convert) could understand
the parameters it is given, wouldn't it? :)
It seems like you want convert to be as generic as:
result convert( parameters )
which is almost as generic as:
result f( parameters )
This is really in the domain of programming languages, not an
interface expressed in C++.
Reverge Studios, Inc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk