On 6/4/2016 8:41 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
Le 03/06/2016 à 22:38, Edward Diener a écrit :
On 6/3/2016 4:01 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
Le 03/06/2016 à 14:40, Oswin Krause a écrit :
Hi,
What are the practical benefits of being able to access PODS by index as opposed to using a tuple instead ?
names with a proper semantic are a huge plus compared to tuples. Such a structure could be helpful in serializing simple data structures automatically. I would add that threre are existing PODs types in any application. With this library you can have comparison, streaming, hash and any function working heterogeneous containers almost for free.
There is something that I would like the library make easier: opt-in for a tuple-like access in addition to a flat_tuple-like access.
Okay, I can understand that. For new libraries if I wanted what magic_get offered I would simply use tuples. But I do understand that there are many people still happily using PODs in their code that want what magic_get offers. If you need to interact with C-libraries you can not choose :)
What, C doesn't have tuples yet ? <g> I program in C++. Personally I have left C far behind. Bjarne and Linus not withstanding, I think C++ as a language should be less backward accomodating to C and move forward on its own more. I do understand that PODs are still attractive as data types. Therefore I think that magic_get would be a nice addition to Boost.