On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Steven Watanabe
wrote:
AMDG
Robert Dailey wrote:
Would you mind going over what exactly this is doing? I'm having a
hard time wrapping my head around it. The documentation isn't helping
much either, as I've never used these before and the descriptions are
very confusing.
I also didn't see a version of mpl::transform that only took 1
template argument. Is this correct?
You're right. I was in too much of a hurry before.
Here's something that actually compiles.
<snip>
In Christ,
Steven Watanabe
The term 'inherit' here does not refer to class inheritance obviously. It's
an unusual usage of the term to me. When you do inherit what exactly is that doing? Is it joining them in a list
container or something? What is the resulting type of
mpl::inherit_linearly::type? Is the result of mpl::inherit_linearly::type
implicitly constructible from an mpl::transform::type? I'm going to read
over the docs a few more times in the meantime to see if I can grasp this
concept. Also, I'm not seeing how you're filling in the 2 placeholders in
the signal_holder typedef.
Also, mpl::vector has a max size limit I'm sure. Right now we have a very
minimal set of packet types, but in the future we have to consider the
possibility that 100+ packet types will exist (the final number is
ultimately unknown). If this is true, I doubt mpl::vector would be usable
anymore since 100 seems too large for it. This makes me feel like I'm going
to have to resort to a completely template-less approach. I might have to
send a generic Packet object to all subscribers, which has a ::Get() method
that performs a static_cast<>() to the concrete type based on an ID.
The only reason I haven't decided to use your ideas so far (which are
extremely great by the way) is because of the limitations of the design. The
design imposes a limit on the number of packet types we can support, which
isn't acceptable given the requirements.
Thanks again for your help.
