Re: [Boost-users] challange to MPL gurus

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] challange to MPL gurus
From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-12 21:21:57

On 12/12/11 19:31, Jeremiah Willcock wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011, Larry Evans wrote:
> 
>> On 12/12/11 17:04, Larry Evans wrote:
>>> On 12/12/11 16:39, Jeremiah Willcock wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> Looking at your code, it seems you solved the problem by removing
>>> the nested specialization of is_end, with a specialization in file
>>> scope of check_unless_end.  I've a vague memory of hearing some similar
>>> solution elsewhere.  Is there some reason why specializations cannot
>>> occur within the class?
>>>
>>> -regards,
>>> Larry
>>
>> The reason is explained in this thread:
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/browse_frm/thread/c040d6d750bf5c08/26bc1ce0b89b5979?#26bc1ce0b89b5979
>>
> 
> I don't see anything in that thread that talks about why member
> templates can't be specialized in-class.  I don't see a good reason for
> that limitation; how is a class member specialization different from one
> in a namespace other than that there can be template parameters on the
> class itself?
> 
> -- Jeremiah Willcock
OOPS, you're right.  The situation was just so similar
( specialization of nested template class within an
outer template class) that I thought the reason given
would apply, but I guess not.

Thanks for pointing out my error.

-regards,
Larry