From: Rozental, Gennadiy (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-26 15:09:44
> I'd certainly be open to make the type_info part optional. A
> question is how to do it.
>
> Using policies may complicate the interface, and from earlier
> discussions,
> and also from the earlier "Future directions" part of the
> docs, it turned
> out that adding new parameters weren't deemed acceptable (due to it no
> longer looking like a cast in that case).
That's is not exactly true since third parameter will have a default value.
So in default case you wont see a difference.
> Another way may be a macro. However, as has been mentioned in
> this thread,
> it appears that the config macros aren't geared for macros
> with optional
> exclusion of RTTI.
No. this has nothing to do with config
> Then one might have a lexical_cast specific macro for it, like
> BOOST_LEXICAL_CAST_USE_RTTI, like you suggested.
We may need this macro even policy based solution would be chosen (only for
convinience). See my previos post
And again if I am right and RTTI has runtime overhead whatever decision we
will make I prefer not to force typeinfo inclusion. User has to have an
option this way or another.
Gennadiy.