Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [TypeIndex] Peer review period for library acceptance begins, ending Thurs 21st Nov
From: pfultz2 (pfultz2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-11-15 09:41:33

> Unfortunately, boost::type_info must derive from std::type_info for
compatibility reasons.

It sounds like you just want to extend the functionality of
`std::type_info`. Why not make `pretty_name()` a free function that accepts
`std::type_info`? Also, an additional `compare_type_info()` function could
be added as well to compare types portably. Plus, it would avoid the issues
with using strange hacks that border on undefined behavior.

> * users want to use Boost without RTTI and fail

Additionally, `boost::type_info` could be a typedef to `std::type_info` when
rtti is enabled and then to some internal type to manage type info when rtti
is disabled.

View this message in context:
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at

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