"David A. Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>>>Your correction above makes everything clear to me now.
>> So do you feel you need an additional library feature? ;-)
>
> I suppose not. What I really wanted was the ability to take a
> regular old template class and crea
- Original Message -
From: "David B. Held" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "Jon Kalb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> icrosoft.com...
> > [...]
> > Vandevoorde and Josuttis call it SFINAE, "substitution failute is not an
> > error."
>
> Ah, I've heard of this, but di
On Thursday 05 December 2002 02:41 pm, David Abrahams wrote:
> I propose:
>
> #ifndef BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG
> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) (defined(symbol) && symbol
> test) #else
> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) 0
> #endif
>
> Comments?
I'm still not sure that BO
David Abrahams wrote:
Your correction above makes everything clear to me now.
So do you feel you need an additional library feature? ;-)
I suppose not. What I really wanted was the ability to take a
regular old template class and create a generator out of it:
template
struct my_type { ...
Gennaro Prota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
>> I propose:
>>
>> #ifndef BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG
>> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) (defined(symbol) && symbol test)
>> #else
>> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) 0
>>
- Original Message -
From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Boost mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [Config] Testing instructions for compiler vendors
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Walter) writes:
>
> >>
> >> 1.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Walter) writes:
>>
>> 1. Should we do something to make this easier for them?
>
> No. We should focus on serving our users.
Our users will be happy and our lives will be easier if their
compilers finally start working.
--
David Abrahams
- Original Message -
From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "boost" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 9:27 PM
Subject: [boost] [Config] Testing instructions for compiler vendors
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to come up with instructions for compiler vendors who w
--- David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> I propose:
>
> #ifndef BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG
> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) (defined(symbol) && symbol test)
> #else
> # define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) 0
> #endif
>
> Comments?
Sorry for jumping in without
Vladimir Prus wrote:
First interpretation is that you're interested in support for
different Unicode encodings, via appropriate facets. Then
Alberto Barbati is the last person who touches this matter,
in
news://news.gmane.org:119/aq72e4$pog$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I assume he's holding a lock on im
"Jon Kalb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
icrosoft.com...
> [...]
> Vandevoorde and Josuttis call it SFINAE, "substitution failute is not an
> error."
Ah, I've heard of this, but didn't realize what it was all about.
> In "C++ Templates: The Complete Guide" (Recommend
Aleksey Gurtovoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> I'm trying to come up with instructions for compiler vendors who want
>> to use Boost to test their compilers. What preprocessor symbols do
>> they need to define? So far, it looks like:
>>
>> - BOOST_NO_COMPILER_CONFIG
"David A. Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So do you feel you need an additional library feature?
>
> That's what I'm trying to find out. It seems like most of the
> stuff is there already in MPL placeholders and binders.
>
>>>Plus your solution here doesn't bind T to a type. :)
>> Are you
> -Original Message-
> From: David B. Held [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [boost] Re: [MPL] Making Generators
>
>
> "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTE
"David B. Held" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [...]
>> I don't know... well, it could detect whether there was a ::type
>> member,
>> [...]
>
> Really??? Is it possible to detect the presence o
David Abrahams wrote:
> I'm trying to come up with instructions for compiler vendors who want
> to use Boost to test their compilers. What preprocessor symbols do
> they need to define? So far, it looks like:
>
> - BOOST_NO_COMPILER_CONFIG
> - BOOST_NO_STDLIB_CONFIG - if they want to c
David Abrahams wrote:
template
struct my_type_generator
{
typedef my_type type;
};
lambda does it
Oops, I meant
lambda >
of course!
Ok, that makes more sense now. :)
, unless of course your compiler
needs BOOST_MPL_AUX_LAMDA_SUPPORT. I don't think it's much of
"David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [...]
> I don't know... well, it could detect whether there was a ::type
> member,
> [...]
Really??? Is it possible to detect the presence of a typedef without
generating an error? How do you do
"David A. Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> template
>> struct my_type_generator
>> {
>> typedef my_type type;
>> };
>> lambda does it
Oops, I meant
lambda >
of course!
> , unless of course your compiler
>> needs BOOST_MPL_AUX_LAMDA_SUPPORT. I don't think i
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David A. Greene
> Sent: 05 December 2002 16:56
>
>
> Is the problem that my_type doesn't contain a ::type
> member? my_type is not a metafunction so maybe it just
> can't be used conveniently with mpl.
IIRC mpl::lambda does need metafunctions to wor
David Abrahams wrote:
template
struct my_type_generator {
template
struct apply {
typedef my_type type;
};
};
Looks good to me.
Is there a convenient way to create this with MPL?
You want it to be more convenient than that?!
Perhaps "convenient" is the wrong word. There a
"David A. Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Posted to boost because MPL is not yet released. At what
> point should these questions go to boost-users?]
>
> Say I have a type my_type:
>
> template
> struct my_type { ... }
>
> Now let's say I want to create a generator that
> binds T to some
"Anthony Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Eric Woodruff writes:
> > "Anthony Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Thus, given that h.storage is properly aligned, (which
[Posted to boost because MPL is not yet released. At what
point should these questions go to boost-users?]
Say I have a type my_type:
template
struct my_type { ... }
Now let's say I want to create a generator that
binds T to some type but leaves U and V free to
be filled in later. Basically,
Eric Woodruff writes:
> "Anthony Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Thus, given that h.storage is properly aligned, (which is the purpose of
> the
> > other union member), after "new(h.storage) Foo", h.storage contains a Foo
> > o
(inline)
"Anthony Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[snip]
> Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
> unsigned char* has _additional_ properties to void* --- you can access the
> object representation of _any_ object through an unsigned char* (and for
P
Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I like BOOST_COMPILER_WORKAROUND. We should use it and ban explicit references
> to compiler/platform/library version macros outside of the config library
> that don't use it.
I'm convinced ;-)
I think we should probably just call it BOOST_WORKAROUN
On Wednesday 04 December 2002 03:27 pm, David Abrahams wrote:
> 1. Should we do something to make this easier for them?
Yeah, let's add a macro BOOST_HOLY_GRAIL to skip all workarounds :)
> 2. What about all the places we make compiler-specific checks in
>Boost code? Could we def
"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm trying to come up with instructions for compiler vendors who want
>> to use Boost to test their compilers. What preprocessor symbols do
>> they need to define? So far, it looks like:
>>
>> - BOOST_NO_COMPILER_CONFIG
>> - BOOST_NO_STDLIB_C
On Thursday 05 December 2002 08:51 am, David Abrahams wrote:
> Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> F> On Wednesday 04 December 2002 08:53 am, David Abrahams wrote:
> >> It looks like some people (ahem! >> BOOST_NO_CONFIG where they should be using BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG. See
> >> boost/fun
Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
F> On Wednesday 04 December 2002 08:53 am, David Abrahams wrote:
>> It looks like some people (ahem! > BOOST_NO_CONFIG where they should be using BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG. See
>> boost/function/function_base.hpp.
>
> Oops. Fixed now.
Well, now John Maddock m
Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
> Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > [...]
> | >
> | > | 3.10p15:
> | > | "If a program attempts to access the stored value of an object through an
> | > | lvalue of other than
Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > [...]
| >
| > | 3.10p15:
| > | "If a program attempts to access the stored value of an object through an
| > | lvalue of other than one of the following types the behavior is undefine
"Rozental, Gennadiy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > If anyone interested I have more generic solution, that
> > includes both
[...snip...]
> namespace mapping {
> template
> class fixed_sized;
>
> // constructed by Key1,Value1,Key2,Value2
On Wednesday 04 December 2002 08:53 am, David Abrahams wrote:
> It looks like some people (ahem! BOOST_NO_CONFIG where they should be using BOOST_STRICT_CONFIG. See
> boost/function/function_base.hpp.
Oops. Fixed now.
Doug
___
Unsubscribe & ot
Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
> Hi,
Hi
> Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> | 3.10p15:
> | "If a program attempts to access the stored value of an object through an
> | lvalue of other than one of the following types the behavior is undefined:
> |
> | - the d
> I'm trying to come up with instructions for compiler vendors who want
> to use Boost to test their compilers. What preprocessor symbols do
> they need to define? So far, it looks like:
>
> - BOOST_NO_COMPILER_CONFIG
> - BOOST_NO_STDLIB_CONFIG - if they want to check the library
>
Joel de Guzman wrote:
BTW, Vladimir Prus, if you are there, this version generates optimal
code on Borland. All the boost::tuples tests except the cons are
working just fine. And did I mention that there is just a single
implementation (no special case for VC6/7). And hey, it can do
a 50 element
Hi,
Anthony Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| 3.10p15:
| "If a program attempts to access the stored value of an object through an
| lvalue of other than one of the following types the behavior is undefined:
|
| - the dynamic type of the object,
|
| ...
|
| - a char or u
Gabriel Dos Reis writes:
> "Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | From: "Gabriel Dos Reis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | > David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > |
> | > | > Hmm, I have a couple of questions answers to
Glen Knowles writes:
> From: Anthony Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >The SleepyCat license is convered here:
>
> As a paying licensee of SleepyCat I can atest that it is more unsuitable
> then you indicated. The "free" license requires that all the source code of
> your program that u
41 matches
Mail list logo
