Re: [Boost-build] ** Need input on alternative selection **

From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-17 15:40:02

On 4/17/07, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> on Tue Apr 17 2007, Vladimir Prus <ghost-AT-cs.msu.su> wrote:
>

> [snip - comparision of C++ overload with bbv2 alternative selection]
>
> Yes, a person designing C++ could say that it isn't clear which
> overload the user wants, or he could design the overload resolution
> rules so as to disambiguate more cases.  In this case, C++ says that
> the first overload is a better match based on more selective matching
> criteria. I'm proposing a similar decision in Boost.Build.

When I saw your proposal, it stroke me exactly this analogy. (Overload
vs Alternative Selection), with all the arguments from Bjarne
Stroustrup in his C++ Design Evolution. I believe that Boost.Build v2
is quite complex, and that selective matching imitates very well what
the user usually wants. I believe it hides a little its complexity
through what is more reasonable to expect.

> [snip]

>
> --
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> http://www.boost-consulting.com
>
> Don't Miss BoostCon 2007! ==> http://www.boostcon.com

-- 
Felipe Magno de Almeida