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

Subject: Re: [boost] [proto] _value doesn't enforce zero arity
From: troy d. straszheim (troy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-08 12:24:07

David Abrahams wrote:
> 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?
> 

Done,

https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/2927

-t