Subject: Re: [boost] [mpl] multiset
From: Bruno Dutra (brunocodutra_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-13 08:51:07
So what you are trying to say is that MPL is frozen for new features, or
just that so far no attempt of improvement has been proven stable enough? I
mean, is there interest on new features, provided of course their merits
are proven, or the community currently understands MPL should not be
changed beyond necessary fixes?
At least a backward compatible port of MPL taking advantage of C++11 syntax
should be fairly easy to achieve, with the benefits of increasing arity
limits up to compiler variadic limits and even overcoming performance
shortcomings for setups which have variadic templates enabled. All of this
with no need of refactoring on the end user side naturally.
On Feb 13, 2015 9:19 AM, "Mathias Gaunard" <mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden]>
> On 11/02/2015 01:25, Bruno Dutra wrote:
> Anyways, MPL seems to have seen better days of activity back in the day,
>> there's lots of opportunities for improvement still and I for one would be
>> glad to help developing some fancier features.
> MPL is not undergoing active development anymore and is just being
> I believe however that some people were interested in doing a new C++11
> version of MPL. I think the problem is that every year or so someone finds
> a new fancy way to do meta-programming with the latest C++ features, with
> noble goals of unifying MPL and Fusion, so most of these rewrites end up as
> experiments rather than stable libraries.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk