On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:08:32 +0200, Robert Kawulak wrote
Hi group,
Some time ago I've written a set of class templates for bounded types (types whose variables may hold a value only from within a specified range).
Just today I've discovered, that basic_bounded class template is even more flexible than I thought! :-) It may be used for types holding their values not only within a specified range, but virtually any set (or, in other words, values conforming to any criterion). For instance a policy template may be written very easily for even numbers only. When it's used as basic_bounded's policy parameter, the new type will only accept even values:
-------------------------------------------
template<typename T> struct even_policy; // implementation not included for conciseness
typedef basic_bounded< even_policy<int> > even_int; even_int i;
i = 2; // OK i = 3; // illegal i += 2; // OK i += 3; // illegal i++; // illegal, might even generate a compiler error
-------------------------------------------
Therefore I think that this flexibility should be reflected in the name of the basic_bounded template as well as the library in general. Maybe it should be something like 'restricted' meaning that the types may hold only values restricted by some constraint? Or maybe 'constrained'? Could some native english speaker write which he thinks is the most appropriate name?
Restricted is ok, but I like constrained better. Please see: http://www.boost.org/doc/html/constrained_value.html http://www.boost.org/boost/date_time/constrained_value.hpp http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=79470 Jeff