Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] review request: addition to type_traits library of is_less_comparable<T, U> and others
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-09 11:42:33

On Dec 8, 2009, at 7:06 AM, Jeffrey Bosboom wrote:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> On Dec 8, 2009, at 6:28 AM, Frédéric Bron wrote:
>>> I prefer void because it is shorter but this could make people think
>>> it will check for operator return void... which is not the case; so
>>> maybe the long version boost::type_traits::any_return is better.
>> By that rationale shouldn't we also require the 3rd parameter to be wrapped in is_convertible_to<...> so people don't think it's requiring a return type of exactly R (e.g. bool)?
> Would this also allow a user to override this behavior when they want to ensure an exact type match?

I suppose so, but seriously, I was not suggesting adding all this complication. I think it should be kept simple and only generalized as far as is proven necessary by real use cases.

David Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at