From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-09 20:20:16
"David Abrahams" wrote
> "Andy Little" writes:
>
>> "David Abrahams" wrote
>>> "Arkadiy Vertleyb" wrote
>>>>> result_of<minus_(int, _1_)>::type f = 3 - _1;
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this direction make sense?
>>>>
>>>> Any particular reason why BOOST_TYPEOF is not an option?
>>>
>>> It requires type registration, whereas this approach should not.
>>> That's the only reason.
>>
>> FWIW I would prefer to live with BOOST_TYPEOF and type
>> registration. I have no doubt that registration will have its
>> problems but only by familiarity will they be solved.
>
> Huh? How will familiarity with the problem help? I can't ask my
> library's users to register types.
Why not? We all want decltype and auto in the language dont we? BOOST_TYPEOF is
the closest we have. Show your users how to use it while we wait for language
support.
regards
Andy Little