On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote

>  Jeff Garland wrote:
>  > My approach was a bit different in that I didn't bother with the buffer at
>  > all, but created the ostream interface directly in hope that the

> But if you are going to compile anyway, then you could use other
> methods as well (pre-processor).

Yes, but macros are evil and impact code readability.  I just really hate lots
of code like:
  
  TRACE("I'm here" << foo << std::endl);

The all caps thing is really bothersome to me.  And of course there is the
loss of ability to set have a tracing version and a non-tracing version in one
 compilation unit.

>  How will this behave for user defined types?

Same because of omitted detail below...

>  Do I have to add a operator<< for both ostream and null_ostream?

No...

template<class T> 
null_ostream&
operator<<(null_ostream& os, const T&)
{
  return os;
}

I'm not saying my idea was fully baked -- there may be some fatal flaw I
haven't worked out.  Just wanted to point out other potential approaches and
requirements while expressing support for getting something like this in boost.

Jeff


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost