I've just finished reading most of the original reviews for Boost.Parameter library. They weren't that helpful.
Hmm, too bad.
They were more about the library than how to use it.
That's just a default. Please see http://boost.org/libs/parameter/doc/html/reference.html#boost- parameter-max-arity
Oops... How did I manage to miss the reference documentation? I guess I need to figure out how to guarantee that I have a sufficient arity for a number Boost.Graph algorithms spread over a number of files and ensure that the arity is defined before Boost.Parameter is included.
Sure; you could use boost::parameter::void_ as shown here: http://boost.org/libs/parameter/doc/html/index.html#class-template- skeleton
Perfect. It's encouraging that I managed to find the same solution, albeit with my own empty struct. I hope this means I'm getting better at generic programming :) Thanks for the feedback. I'll have to spend more time poring over the notions and details of deduced parameters. We'll see what I end up with.
Heh, heh: http://boost.org/libs/parameter/doc/html/index.html#documentation
I would proably invent a hypothetical C++ declaration syntax (as though named/deduced paramters were built-in features), document that, and then document the functions in terms of it.
That's why I asked :) I was wondering if there had been any recent developments along those lines. Maybe I'll adopt some kind of python- esque model for documentation. Those guys do a pretty good job getting the point across. Andrew Sutton asutton@cs.kent.edu