Re: [boost] [proto] _value doesn't enforce zero arity

Subject: Re: [boost] [proto] _value doesn't enforce zero arity
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-08 11:40:41

on Tue Apr 07 2009, "troy d. straszheim" <troy-AT-resophonic.com> wrote:

> Gevorg Voskanyan wrote:
>> Eric Niebler wrote:
>>>
>>> Yep, it compiles, and yep, it violates the preconditions. I choose not to enforce
>>> the preconditions because doing so would cause extra template instantiations and
>>> lengthen compile times. As long as valid programs compile and do the right thing,
>>> I'm happy.
>>
>
> OK, thanks Eric.
>
>> How about a macro BOOST_PROTO_EXTRA_CHECKING or something like that to have those
> kind of checks conditionally?
>
> I could see a BOOST_MPL_DISABLE_ASSERTS token, behavior analogous to
> BOOST_DISABLE_ASSERTS.

It's a very good idea, IMO.  Open a ticket?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com