On 04/09/10 12:10, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
Larry Evans wrote:
I'm still not seeing it :( I thought algebraic data types were one thing OO programming did well. For example, a stack is and ADT and the stl library has a stack.
ADT stands for Abstract Data Type. It's something else entirely.
I suggest you take a look at wikipedia: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algebraic_data_type>
OOPS. Sorry. Yet the example shown on the wiki page looks like an abstract syntax tree for which a class hierarchy is entirely suitable. For example, each constructor alternative in: data Expression = Number Int | Add Expression Expression | Minus Expression | Mult Expression Expression | Divide Expression Expression would be subclass of an abstract base class, Expression. So, I'm "still" still not seeing the advantage of a boost.variant over a type hierarchy. -regards, Larry