Subject: Re: [boost] [tti] review
From: Nathan Ridge (zeratul976_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-17 17:48:08
> On 7/17/2011 4:10 PM, Edward Diener wrote:
> > I agree with Jeff's suggestion that the matching metafunction should take a metafunction that defaults to is_same rather than always testing for type equality (and now I see why he was also suggesting that in the Type Traits Extension review :).
> I will look further into adding this but I strongly feel that I should
> not drop the simple functionality currently provided, where the end-user
> can just pass an actual type.
As a casual Boost user, I would welcome this. I would find TTI very
useful, but I do not know MPL beyond the very basics, and I'd rather not
have to learn it just so that I can use TTI. I think others may be in
the same position.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk