Gennadiy Rozental wrote: > > > 5. Usage std::type_info for reflection > > > I don't think we should enforce RTTI for the variant users. We should > > > be able to postpone the decision on what kind of reflection > > > information user want till instantiation time. > > > > Please elaborate on this point. FYI, the current variant::type method > > is provided so as to mirror boost::any. > > Take a look on recent discussion on lexical type modifications. Here I > express my concern about RTTI affecting the performance of whole > application. Apparently I was not able to find enough confederates to > justify an efforts of making RTTI optional part of interface. > But still the same applies to Variant library. Presence of typeinfo > header rules out it's usage for me (I will probably need to hack into your > code and eliminate all the references to type_info locally, would I decide > to use it)
If the issue concerns you this much, you might propose something along the lines of BOOST_NO_EXCEPTIONS. That is, you might try: "BOOST_NO_RTTI anyone?" - Eric _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
