Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] syntax redesign
From: paul Fultz (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-14 21:58:28

It is very impressive. I wonder if a library could be built for writing DSLs using the preprocessor. Much like Boost.Proto lets you write DSLs using C++ operators, another library could be used to build grammars and define transformations based on preprocessor tokens. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> To: boost_at_[hidden] Cc: Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 8:33 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] syntax redesign on Sun Dec 11 2011, Lorenzo Caminiti <> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti_at_[hidden]> wrote: >>>> The goal here is to use Boost.Contract to /completely/ specify the >>>> interface for the positive abstract data type. > > For whomever is curious, the Boost.Contract named and deduced > parameter examples now compile: > > > Here's an example that uses a bit of everything: Contracts, concepts, > named/deduced function and template parameters: (gulp) wow!  That's _very_ impressive. It's just too bad the syntax is so intrusive on that of C++; it's like a whole new language to learn, debug, etc.  There are a few contract programming frameworks out there that are much less capable but at the same time don't intrude so much (e.g. which probably only builds on MSVC). I wonder if it's possible to make parts of this framework usable in the same way, so that people can approach it more gradually. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes:

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