Subject: Re: [boost] Another variant type (was: [peer review queue tardiness] [was Cleaning out the Boost review queue] Review Queue mem
From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-04 07:41:15
On 04/02/2015 07:33 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> On 4/2/2015 2:17 PM, Gonzalo BG wrote:
>> I'll briefly chime in to state that I have been using Eric Niebler's
>> tagged_variant for a couple of months now and am very happy with it, it
>> comes with range-v3:
>> (note: the utility folder of range-v3 is full of true gems)
> FWIW, I consider it usable, but not fully baked.
The code at:
shows variant_data<T,Ts...> is defined recursively.
Wouldn't this cause large compile times?
The reason I say this is because, IIRC, one of the
reasons for the some of the preprocessor use in the current mpl
is to reduce compile times by "chunking" a number
of the T's into a single component in the recursive
inheritance chain. IIRC, the chunk size in mpl was 10.
Have you seen any compile time problems with this
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk