> I'd certainly be open to make the type_info part optional. A > question is how to do it. > > Using policies may complicate the interface, and from earlier > discussions, > and also from the earlier "Future directions" part of the > docs, it turned > out that adding new parameters weren't deemed acceptable (due to it no > longer looking like a cast in that case).
That's is not exactly true since third parameter will have a default value. So in default case you wont see a difference. > Another way may be a macro. However, as has been mentioned in > this thread, > it appears that the config macros aren't geared for macros > with optional > exclusion of RTTI. No. this has nothing to do with config > Then one might have a lexical_cast specific macro for it, like > BOOST_LEXICAL_CAST_USE_RTTI, like you suggested. We may need this macro even policy based solution would be chosen (only for convinience). See my previos post And again if I am right and RTTI has runtime overhead whatever decision we will make I prefer not to force typeinfo inclusion. User has to have an option this way or another. Gennadiy. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
