On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@getdesigned.at> wrote:
Zach Laine wrote:
Quite true. But the code above is user-supplied, so the user can write their code so that such collisions do not occur, if they need identical behavior to int in NDEBUG mode, or the library author could change the spelling of value() to be something less likely to cause problems, or both.
Yeah, that would be possible. But you know? I think I'll stick with unconstrained. :-)
I agree. In fact, I'd stick with the constrained versions. But there are always some users who will want to throw a switch and get back to plain ints, so there is verifiably no performance penalty. For those users, unconstrained might or might not cut it, depending on their compiler. Zach