Re: Library proposal - indexed_array

From: Richard Hodges (hodges.r_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-06-03 06:44:14

On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 at 08:31, Julien Blanc via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> Le jeudi 02 juin 2022 à 14:00 +0200, Maximilian Riemensberger a écrit :
> > On 6/2/22 13:30, Julien Blanc wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> >
> > I see. The first one is definitely a language limitation. But I guess
> > it's mostly an inconvenience to the users of the library if they are
> > on C++14.  The other ones as far as I can see have counterparts in
> > boost that would work in C++14 as well.  So I guess it could be done
> > without too much hassle if there is a need and the library would be
> > included in boost.  Either way, it's very useful regardless of the
> > std version details.
>
> I'm already depending on mp11, so adding a dependency to more boost
> libraries (i have been stuck too long with c++11 and old boost
> releases, and completely missed that hof provides is_invocable and
> apply) is not an issue.
>
> I would need, however, to provide an unified syntax for declaring
> intervals for C++14 and C++17, otherwise a compiler update would break
> user code. I think this can be done only by using a macro (which would
> be mandatory only for C++14 code, and provided in C++17 for backward
> compatibility). Anyhow, I created a github issue to track any progress
> on this side.
>
> For those interested, i filled up the feature comparison table (
> https://julien-blanc-tgcm.github.io/indexed_array/comparison.html ) and
> added some use cases in the readme file.
>

Thank you this has helped me.

I have one question to add:

Are you able to provide one or two motivating use cases? i.e. scenarios in
which I would strongly prefer to use this library rather than a std::array
and static_cast?

>
> Best regards,
>
> Julien
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>