From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-04 22:10:34
"Iain K. Hanson" <ikh_at_[hidden]> wrote
> On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 09:30:19PM -0400, Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
[...]
> > And template metaprogramming is just template hackery, correct?
>
> No! No! No! now we have type saftey,
Boost PP doesnt compromise type safety...
> namespaces,
Agreed, but we can and do approximate them with prefixes...
> overload sets, dynamic &
> static polymorphism,
We can have polymorphism if we want, see my post sometime ago:
http://listarchives.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg79530.php. We do use this
technique in our BOOST_TYPEOF proposal.
> metafunctions, and metafunction classes rtc.etc.etc.
> [...]
Things change. New techniques get discovered. What used to be "ugly
macros" now becomes quite elegant and _very_ useful mechanism, that can be
used to achieve things that otherwise ***just cannot be achieved***, and
_especially_ if you use macros in the library interface. Why should we
throw this away?
Regards,
Arkadiy