"Paul Mensonides" <pmenso57@comcast.net> writes:
I think a template-based version is unacceptable for one primary reason. To the template mechanism, 001 and 0001 are the same thing. That is a bad thing when specifying groups of binary bits, as the groupings are often not simple four-bit groupings. The macro version can differentiate between the two, and can specify any pattern of bit groups. Other then the ability to tack UL (etc.) onto the end, it isn't a great strength that the macro produces a literal--only that it produces a compile-time constant suitably typed. IMO, as far as this is concerned, the template-based version and the macro-based version are more-or-less equivalent. The great strength of the macro version is the support for arbitrary bit groupings.
I guess I consider that a non-essential but very-nice-to-have feature. So I wouldn't go as far as labelling the template-based approach "unacceptable," but that does tilt me strongly back towards the macro approach. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com