Re: [boost] Boost.Align review begins today

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Align review begins today
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-21 01:52:31

On Sunday 20 April 2014 21:46:34 Mostafa wrote:
> 3. Implementation
>    3.1) Why not reuse boost::static_unsigned_max in max_align?
>    3.2) Why not the more readable
> "boost::integer_traits<std::size_t>::const_max"
>      instead of the less readable "~static_cast<std::size_t>(0)"?

Since that was my suggestion, I'll comment on that. I'm aware of Boost.Integer 
but still suggested the "~static_cast<std::size_t>(0)" variant to avoid the 
dependency and integer_traits template instantiation cost. integer_traits.hpp 
header is considerably heavier to include than the max_count_of.hpp. I believe 
static_unsigned_max is not used in max_align.hpp for the same reasons.

IMO the current code in Boost.Align is quite readable as it is and using 
Boost.Integer primitive wouldn't improve readability too much to justify the 
costs.