On 5 July 2013 10:44, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.boost@kayari.org> wrote:
On 5 July 2013 00:57, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
Unfortunately, I have hit t apparently well-known problem. It is the Fusion begin/end ADL issues with C++0x range-based for and such, as discussed and reported here:
http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2010/12/174199.php https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4028
There has been no feedback to the ticket #8241, so I'm not sure what is the Fusion authors' view on std::array adoption. So, a couple of questions:
Do the Fusion authors consider any cure for the ADL issues?
Stop using C++0x compilers and use C++11 compilers? :)
We fixed the standard via Option 5 from http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2011/n3257.pdf
Jonathan, Thanks for this paper. It is still unclear to me if/how the option 4/5 might solve the ambiguous calls to begin/end as here: std::array<int, 3> = {{1,2,3}}; boost::fusion::distance(begin(arr), end(arr)) == 3; as the std::array does provide begin/end members. AFAIU, solution that remains is to fully qualify: boost::fusion::distance(boost::fusion::begin(arr), boost::fusion::end(arr)) == 3; So, the following rule kicks: "to call begin() and end() members if they exist, and if not then to make unqualified calls as specified in the current draft." I'm missing something, am I not? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net