BLS wrote:
The current Template specialization implementation is doing a best fit search anyway, so why constraints are not able to use the same mechanism. ?
The template specialization method is based on types - but there's no way to look inside those types and specialize based on properties of those types. That's where constraints come in.
Constraints use a completely different matching method than the type parameters do. It makes intuitive sense to logically separate them, rather than to mix them up.
bearophile brings in several times Scala/OCAML like pattern matching. Why not using that for constraints ?
I have no idea how that works, though Bartosz has been looking into it.
