Brian McNamara <lorgon <at> cc.gatech.edu> writes:
On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 02:38:23PM +0100, JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
De: Brian McNamara <lorgon <at> cc.gatech.edu>
[...]
Currently, the approach is that the first index with a given tag is picked [...] I'm not convinced the approach you suggest is more convenient: [...] A static *warning* would be ideal here :)
A warning is better than nothing. I still prefer an error.
I don't buy the meta-programming argument. I think it's far more important to automatically detect an error for "normal" users (who are probably the majority of users) than to ensure that we don't "inconvenience" metaprogrammers (the minority). (Metaprogrammers are smart enough to be able to generate their own unique tags, anyway.)
Well, I don't have a strong feeling about this. I agree that the situation is in most cases an error, so if nobody else comments on this, I'll add a BOOST_STATIC_ERROR. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo PS. Have you had a chance to take a look at the review notes? Comments on naming issues raised there are most welcome.