On 05/22/12 15:34, Steven Watanabe wrote: [snip]
Online documentation can be found here: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/ [snip] Looks very interesting.
I've done a somewhat brief review of just the online documentation. I'll try to do a more complete review later. Here's my current comments: * Virtual functions do not *require* dynamic memory: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: C++ provides runtime polymorphism through virtual functions. ... They require dynamic memory management. However, I don't think dynamic memory is required because just references to stack locations or pointers pointing to stack locations could be used to take advantage of virtual functions. * 'Operation' term used before defined: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: Operations can have more than one any argument. before any definition of 'Operation' occurs. Only by seeing the: addable<> argument to the mpl::vector does the term 'Operation' begin to make sense, and then the reader has to guess that all the mpl::vector arguments are operations, and that all the previous 'operations' were unary. However, I'm still not sure that's correct. It would help if some link to 'Operation' defintion were provided everywhere that the term, 'Operation', occurs. Maybe, where the term, 'opeation" occurs, there should be a link to: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... * 'match' term used before defined: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: The types of the arguments must match or the behavior is undefined. before any definition of 'match' or 'arguments' occurs. I'm just guessing from the arguments to x and y, that 'arguments' means arguments to the any CTOR, but then the CTOR argument to z is an expression; hence, I'm guessing that that expression is allowed by the addable<> template argument to the mpl::vector arg to the any_type. * public construct/copy/destruct item 1 undefined T: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... under: 1. template<typename U> explicit any(const U & data); says: oncept must not refer to any placeholder besides T. However, T is not defined (or the definition is not obvious). * Mistitled Assign operator description: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: any public construct/copy/destruct 1. any& operator=(const any & other); Assigns to an any. Shouldn't this be retitled something like: any public assign operator 1. any& operator=(const any & other); Assigns to an any. * Misplaced copy CTOR description: The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: any public member functions 1. template<typename U> any(U & arg); This this is a constructor, not a member function, shouldn't this be moved to: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... and placed under: any public construct/copy/destruct Also, all of the other items seem to be CTOR descriptions also; hence, shouldn't they be similarly moved? * Typo "more general" in 'Design Notes.Constructors': The page: http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/... says: The last kind of constructor "upcasts" from one concept to another more general more general concept. with the typo of duplicated "more general". -regards, Larry