Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Align review begins today
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-21 01:52:31
On Sunday 20 April 2014 21:46:34 Mostafa wrote:
> 3. Implementation
> 3.1) Why not reuse boost::static_unsigned_max in max_align?
> 3.2) Why not the more readable
> "boost::integer_traits<std::size_t>::const_max"
> instead of the less readable "~static_cast<std::size_t>(0)"?
Since that was my suggestion, I'll comment on that. I'm aware of Boost.Integer
but still suggested the "~static_cast<std::size_t>(0)" variant to avoid the
dependency and integer_traits template instantiation cost. integer_traits.hpp
header is considerably heavier to include than the max_count_of.hpp. I believe
static_unsigned_max is not used in max_align.hpp for the same reasons.
IMO the current code in Boost.Align is quite readable as it is and using
Boost.Integer primitive wouldn't improve readability too much to justify the
costs.