Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono/date] year/day/week literals
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-03 06:06:43

Le 03/05/13 12:01, Vicente J. Botet Escriba a écrit :
> Hi,
> on the GSoC discussion about Boost.Chrono/Date proposal we were
> discussing about date construction.
> Some of us think that we need to use named types for day, month, year
> and week so that the date constructors are not ambiguous.
> Everyone agree with the constant object for month.
> date dt(year(2013), may, day(3));
> But having to use day(3) or year(2013) seems to wordy.
> I was wondering if we can not add some literals for day, year and week
> so that we can just write
> date dt(2013y, may, 3d);
> The advantage I see in addition to been less wordy, is that we will
> have a compile error when the year, day or week is out of range.
Oh I forget the drawbacks. As any other suffix it would need to add a
using statement

  using boost::chrono::dates::literals;

  date dt(2013y, may, 3d);

Are any standardized suffixes for day,week and year? Note that these are
not the same as days, years, weeks.


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