[mpl::map] Still problems with map
Ji Dave, Hi Alexey, It seems that at least macro definition for the map of 150 tuples worked. Now I face a new problem. To reduce compilation times we decided to use map10, map20 etc. Unfortunately as we found out this will not compile if I pass to map10 only 7 arguments. With unnumbered map these elements were default initialized with "na" type. Why isn't this the case with numbered maps? I get the following g++ errors: /path/fname.hpp:5945: error: wrong number of template arguments (4, should be 10) /user/some_uname/projects/libs/boost/include/boost/mpl/map/aux_/preprocessed/typeof_based/map10.hpp:141: error: provided for `template<class P0, class P1, class P2, class P3, class P4, class P5, class P6, class P7, class P8, class P9> struct boost::mpl::map10' I assume that the macro generation was successful if I receive the error: /path/fname.hpp:11036: error: wrong number of template arguments (71, should be 150) /user/some_uname/projects/libs/boost/include/boost/mpl/map/aux_/numbered.hpp:41: error: provided for `template<class P0, class P1, class P2, class P3, class P4, class P5, class P6, class P7, class P8, class P9, class P10, class P11, class P12, class P13, class P14, class P15, class P16, class P17, class P18, class P19, class P20, class P21, class P22, class P23, class P24, class P25, class P26, class P27, class P28, class P29, class P30, class P31, class P32, class P33, class P34, class P35, class P36, class P37, class P38, class P39, class P40, class P41, class P42, class P43, class P44, class P45, class P46, class P47, class P48, class P49, class P50, class P51, class P52, class P53, class P54, class P55, class P56, class P57, class P58, class P59, class P60, class P61, class P62, class P63, class P64, class P65, class P66, class P67, class P68, class P69, class P70, class P71, class P72, class P73, class P74, class P75, class P76, class P77, class P78, class P79, class P80, class P81, class P82, class P83, class P84, class P85, class P86, class P87, class P88, class P89, class P90, class P91, class P92, class P93, class P94, class P95, class P96, class P97, class P98, class P99, class P100, class P101, class P102, class P103, class P104, class P105, class P106, class P107, class P108, class P109, class P110, class P111, class P112, class P113, class P114, class P115, class P116, class P117, class P118, class P119, class P120, class P121, class P122, class P123, class P124, class P125, class P126, class P127, class P128, class P129, class P130, class P131, class P132, class P133, class P134, class P135, class P136, class P137, class P138, class P139, class P140, class P141, class P142, class P143, class P144, class P145, class P146, class P147, class P148, class P149> struct boost::mpl::map150' Many thanks for your kind help. With Kind Regards, Ovanes Markarian
"Ovanes Markarian" <om_boost@keywallet.com> writes:
It seems that at least macro definition for the map of 150 tuples worked. Now I face a new problem. To reduce compilation times we decided to use map10, map20 etc. Unfortunately as we found out this will not compile if I pass to map10 only 7 arguments. With unnumbered map these elements were default initialized with "na" type. Why isn't this the case with numbered maps?
Because they weren't designed that way. If you want to pass 7 arguments, use map7<...> -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
It seems that at least macro definition for the map of 150 tuples worked. Now I face a new problem. To reduce compilation times we decided to use map10, map20 etc. Unfortunately as we found out this will not compile if I pass to map10 only 7 arguments. With unnumbered map these elements were default initialized with "na" type. Why isn't this
;) That was easy. But if I use the preprocessor statement to generate map150, which is derived from map50, then I do not get map149. Is it correct? So then I need to write for each map I am going to use a separate preprocessor statement. Is it so, or do I oversee smth? Thanks in advance, Ovanes -----Original Message----- From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave@boost-consulting.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 8:33 PM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [mpl::map] Still problems with map "Ovanes Markarian" <om_boost@keywallet.com> writes: the case with numbered maps? Because they weren't designed that way. If you want to pass 7 arguments, use map7<...> -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
"Ovanes Markarian" <om_boost@keywallet.com> writes:
;)
That was easy. But if I use the preprocessor statement to generate map150, which is derived from map50, then I do not get map149. Is it correct?
I don't know. I would have guessed you do. Why not try it? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
participants (2)
-
David Abrahams
-
Ovanes Markarian