[2003-05-01] Paul Mensonides wrote:

> Rene Rivera wrote:
> > No totally sure what arbitrary macros you mean. But yes, the "escaped"
> > token-string can be anything and it would only get inserted/evaluated
> > as the _last_ step. So it would have to unwind the parse recursion,
> > and then insert the escaped token-string. And with the #eval you
> > could control when any currectly accumulated #escape token-strings
> > are inserted.
> 
> What I meant was something like:
> 
> #define ID(x) x
> #define MACRO() 123
> 
> ID( #escape "MACRO()" )
> 
> Are you suggesting that the result should be "MACRO()" or that the
> invocation/processing of the escaped string should be deferred until after
> top-level scanning moves past it (conceptually)?  In that case, it would
expand
> to "123".  BTW, I like the second one better, but only because I can think
of,
> as usual, pathological usages of it. ;)

I also prefer the second, as I also can see "entertaining" uses for it. But
I was considering both at the same time, as in it's a choice to make
experimentally, when and if anyone implements such a thing :-)


-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera@[...].org - grafik@[...].com
-- 102708583@icq
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost