Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] syntax redesign
From: Matt Calabrese (rivorus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-31 16:54:26

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> For example, I _think_ (but I've not implemented this yet) that I can
> simplify the syntax like this:

Looks good, I use pretty much exactly the same syntax in my library
concerning parameter lists and templates (
79 and 96 are okay examples). The only thing I'm confused about is how you
specify the return type of your CONTRACT_FUNCTION -- in particular, you did
not wrap it in parentheses. Are you really able to do that, or is that a
mistake? If that syntax is indeed possible, then I'd like to see the
implementation because I too would love to be able to rid myself of some

-Matt Calabrese

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