ASPN ActiveState Programmer Network
ActiveState
/ Home / Perl / PHP / Python / Tcl / XSLT /
/ Safari / My ASPN /
Cookbooks | Documentation | Mailing Lists | Modules | News Feeds | Products | User Groups


Recent Messages
List Archives
About the List
List Leaders
Subscription Options

View Subscriptions
Help

View by Topic
ActiveState
.NET Framework
Open Source
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl
Web Services
XML & XSLT

View by Category
Database
General
SOAP
System Administration
Tools
User Interfaces
Web Programming
XML Programming


MyASPN >> Mail Archive >> boost
boost
[boost] Re: concept archetypes
by Craig Henderson other posts by this author
Oct 15 2002 8:38PM messages near this date
[boost] concept archetypes | Re: [boost] Re: concept archetypes
"v m" <boost_vam@[...].com>  wrote in message
news:20021015190642.92370.qmail@[...]..
>  hi,
>   As part of my course project, I am planning to make
>  changes to the boost archetype classes so that they
>  conform to the current ANSI/ISO C++
>  standard(INCITS/ISO/IEC 14882-1998).
Most (all) Boosters strive for this, compiler willing.

>  During the
>  process, I will have to discuss quite a few things
>  about these archetype classes and related issues. I
>  wanted to know if i could post my queries on this
>  mailing list or if i should contact the developer(s)
>  of the archetype classes.
I guess the mailing list is Ok.

>   Just to get a feel of the type of queries i would be
>  asking, here are some questions i have in mind right
>  now:
> 
>  1. My primary source of the current archetype classes
>  is this :
>  http://www.boost.org/boost/concept_archetype.hpp
> 
>  Is there a more recent header, or is there any such
>  header under development?
Boost 1.29.0 will contain the latest publicly available version. This was
only release last week, so it is good a recent, however, specific header
hasn't changed since 17 July 2001.

>  2. My professor suggested that since the archetypes
>  are used only at compile time, most of the methods in
>  those classes need NOT have bodies. Any comments?
He's right :-)

>  3. There are several differences between the standard
>  and the current archetype classes, especially the
>  iterator archetype classes. For example, almost all
>  the relational operators (operator==, operator!= etc)
>  have a return type of bool whereas the standard
>  requires a return type convertible to bool. Would
>  changing the return type have any unwanted
>  consequences (not particularly in the
>  concept_archetype.hpp) ?
How is this not conforming to the standard? The return type is bool. The
standard requires a return type that is convertible to bool (Table 72). bool
is implicitly convertible to bool. What's the problem?
The synopsis of the iterator class in 24.2 itself defines the return type as
bool.

Regards
-- Craig




_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Thread:
v m
Craig Henderson
Douglas Gregor
Victor A. Wagner, Jr.
Douglas Gregor

Privacy Policy | Email Opt-out | Feedback | Syndication
© ActiveState Software Inc. All rights reserved