$include_dir="/home/hyper-archives/boost/include"; include("$include_dir/msg-header.inc") ?>
From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-03 12:41:39
"Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote in message:
> MPL changelog for 1.32 release
> ******************************
>
> 1. Nullary metafunction classes are no longer special-cased, and
> are *not* identical to nullary metafunctions:
>
> +-------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
> | Nullary... | Before | Now |
> +=========================+===============+===========================+
> | metafunction | ``f::type`` | ``f::type`` |
> +-------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
> | metafunction class | ``c::type`` | ``c::apply<>::type`` or |
> | | | ``c::apply::type`` [1]_ |
> +-------------------------+---------------+---------------------------+
Great! This asymmetry has bothered me for a long time.
> 4. ``<boost/mpl/assert_is_same.hpp>`` header has been replaced by a more
> general ``<mpl/assert.hpp>``; the new asserts provide a significantly
> higher-quality diagnostics. See the table below for the new equivalents of
> the old macros:
>
>
+-------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
------------------+
> | Before | Now
|
>
+===========================================+===================================
==================+
> | ``BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_IS_SAME(t1, t2)`` | ``BOOST_MPL_ASSERT((
boost::is_same<t1,t2> ))`` |
>
+-------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
------------------+
> | ``BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_IS_NOT_SAME(t1, t2)`` | ``BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_NOT((
boost::is_same<t1,t2> ))`` |
>
+-------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------
------------------+
I liked BOOST_MPL_ASSERT_IS_SAME because I didn't have to use double
parantheses. For the other uses now supported by BOOST_MPL_ASSERT, I could just
use BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT.
BTW, I remember that the reference documentation on boost consulting (or
somewhere) used to include documentation of some important macros. Why not add
this to the main docs?
Best Regards,
Jonathan