Re: [boost] [chrono/date] year/day/week literals

Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono/date] year/day/week literals
From: Rob Stewart (robertstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-04 09:35:52

On May 3, 2013, at 6:06 AM, "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Le 03/05/13 12:01, Vicente J. Botet Escriba a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> 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;

That alone negates the wordiness argument. Few will type "day()" enough times, in a file, to offset that using directive.

> date dt(2013y, may, 3d);

The number first order, and need for an underscore, is ugly to me. I'd prefer constants of the form dayN to this.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)