Hi Paul,
Is there any particular reason why you need 'i' in the outer dimension? If not, regular SEQ_FOR_EACH and SEQ_FOR_EACH_I should work together:
Actually yes, I do need it -- I am generating series of typedefs, each one depending on the previous, and I need to generate names for them. I also need 'i' in the inner loop. My guess is, I have to use REPEAT, passing sequence as auxiliary data, and using SEQ_ELEM to access current element. This looks a little clumsier, and probably less efficient (?) than more native SEQ_FOR_EACH, but it's fine with me as long as I know that this is the best I can do in this case (REPEAT *is* reentrant, right?). Also, do I understand correctly, that, if I wanted to wrap the call to REPEAT in yet another macro, something like SEQ_ENUM[_TRAILING](seq, macro), I would have to take care myself of this macro to be reentrant? In the simplest case, I would just have to provide two identical macros, SEQ_ENUM_0 and SEQ_ENUM_1, and use the first one outside, and the second -- inside (this would take care of one layer nesting).
(Of course, this design limitation doesn't exist in Chaos. All higher-order macros are reentrant--without implementation replication.)
But I would still have to take special care of reentrancy of my own macros, correct? I actually think disallowing recursion of function-like macros is totally artificial and unjustified in the first place :-( Regards, Arkadiy