This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Simplifing tuples


Matt Austern wrote:

On Oct 14, 2004, at 6:29 AM, Giovanni Bajo wrote:

[sorry, sent to gcc@ by mistake]

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

I'm more in favor of compile-time construction via metaprogramming
(only as complicated as is absolutely necessary, of course...). In
the long run, this seems like the more robust solution. Also, one
without build dependencies. It seems like either way you'll have some
complexity, it's just where you choose to put it.


I'm not sure. We could commit the generated <tuple> to CVS much like we do with
configure for instance, so that there is no build dependence at all. The only
cons I see with the generation program is that hacking could get much harder,
depending on how the generation program is written.


I assume you're aware of the tricks that the Boost people play,
exploiting the fact that the C preprocessor is Turing complete?

I'm not endorsing those tricks; I find them appalling, and I'd like
to see the preprocessor die.  Just thought we ought to be aware
of all options, if we aren't already.


Not sure if this is relevant, but I've been told that there is a good chance the next version of boost will convert their tuples from template metaprogramming to preprocessor magic.


It should be noted, I'm not using this as a pro-preprocessor person, more an anti-excessive metatemplates.

Chris

--Matt



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]