Subject: Re: [boost] [operators] A modern SFINAE-based version of boost::operators?
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-14 19:04:25
Le 14/11/2017 Ã 02:38, David Stone via Boost a Ã©critÂ :
> I am working on a proposal for the next committee meeting that would
> generate more of these operators. We recently voted in a feature for the
> comparison operators: the user defines `operator<=>` and gets all current
> comparison operators generated automatically. I will be sure to post my
> paper to this list for feedback prior to the mailing deadline. My paper
> will include a fairly comprehensive rationale for the design, which will be
> different from Boost.Operators. It has the advantage of needing only to
> work with code built against the latest standard, and it has language
> support, and it has the "disadvantage" of being done by default instead of
> being explicitly requested by the user, which obviously has slightly
> different design constraints.
I'm curious on knowing more on your approach.
Note that the operator<==> return something that states what kind of
order we want to define, and in this sense this is an explicit mapping.
I like the explicit mapping and find the implicit one could be a source
I'm realy interested on the derivation of functions from other in
general. If you need a reader with a another point of view, please,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk