Re: [boost] Provisional Boost.Generic and Boost.Auto_Function (concepts without concepts)

Subject: Re: [boost] Provisional Boost.Generic and Boost.Auto_Function (concepts without concepts)
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-13 18:23:58

On 11/13/2010 5:15 PM, Matt Calabrese wrote:
> For those of you who were following the Boost.Auto_Function call for
> interest, this thread sort of spawned off of that.
>
> Boost.Generic (not a part of boost) is a C++0x library intended to replace
> BCCL as a way of specifying concepts and concept maps, and, when used in
> conjunction with Boost.Auto_Function (also not a part of boost, though it's
> in the sandbox and has online documentation at
> http://www.rivorus.com/auto_function ) as a way to get concept-based
> function template overloading. For anyone who followed the original thread,
> I'm happy to say that I'm just a few days away from being able to fully and
> automatically recognize standard library and user-defined iterator types,
> though I've had a [not so] surprising amount of compiler crashes and
> workarounds along the way. For an example of how concept mapping will look
> (revised from earlier versions as I've made much more progress with
> implementation), see http://codepaste.net/n47ocu And for an example of how
> this will be used by Boost.Auto_Function, see http://codepaste.net/1faj21 .
> At this point I'm not trying to do the equivalent of what would have been
> C++0x "scoped" concept maps, though at some point I may try to support them,
> but it would imply calling algorithms through macro invocations (yuck).

What is the necessary C++0x support needed for Boost.Generic and 
Boost.Auto_Function ? What compilers currently provide that support ? I 
am guessing that to replace BCCL a compiler that largely supports C++0x 
is needed and that there may not be many right now that do. That is not 
meant to be discouraging at all but it needs to be denoted in the docs 
what current compiler(s) can be used.