Re: [boost] [tti] review

Subject: Re: [boost] [tti] review
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-17 18:20:11

On 7/17/2011 5:48 PM, Nathan Ridge wrote:
>
>> 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.

I hear you !

Eddie