Joel falcou-4 wrote:
On 10/07/11 22:59, Edward Diener wrote:
I will look into this. It is obviously more difficult programming with the latter than the former, but it is probably doable although with much effort. It may not be worth the effort.
What the former syntax reflects is an exact transcription of the template parameters with each comma replaced by ')(' and a starting and ending parentheses. So for the template:
'template <class,class,int,class,template <class> class InnerTemplate,class,long> struct ManyParameters { }'
the parameters are:
'(class)(class)(int)(class)(template <class> class InnerTemplate)(class)(long)'
and all I had to do as an end-user was copy the template parameters, add a '(' at the beginning, add a ')' at the end, and change every ',' to a ')('. As a programmer I take the sequence and directly convert it to the template parameters via a BOOST_PP_SEQ_ENUM.
Dunno if it helps but nt2 has a NT2_STRIP macro adapted from a amcro pasoted by Steven Watanabe that conditionnally remove parens around symbols. You can then pass parameters containing comma to the preprocessor this way :
FOO( (template<class T, class U> struct foo) )
and this way if no comma is involved
FOO( struct bar )
THe cod eis available under Boost licensing and can be incorporated w/e your need.
Hi, if the Joel proposal works for variadic anon variadic preprocessors it should retained by the library. It is much more clear than any other syntax, as follows the C++ one. Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/TTI-Review-tp3658414p3661446.html Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.