if you need a construct that forms a scope, accomplishes a tasks and then exists the scope from anywhere in between, that's a function.
Yes, I remember thinking like this at the beginning. But declaring a function each times sometimes makes the code less readable. It's like declaring a functor for iterating over all objects of a collection : you can do it but BOOST_FOREACH is just much more readable. What is more you need to give a name to your function. It's just more complicated than just writing the name of the macro. Creating a function when you only want to solve a break-scope problem is doing too much IMHO. It's using a specific aspect of the language that allows to break anywhere, not a tool that is meant to do it. Best regards, Pierre --- En date de : Dim 6.9.09, Stefan Strasser <strasser@uni-bremen.de> a écrit : De: Stefan Strasser <strasser@uni-bremen.de> Objet: Re: [boost] [Boost.Breakable] Any interest in a Boost Breakable library? À: boost@lists.boost.org Date: Dimanche 6 Septembre 2009, 13h43 Am Sunday 06 September 2009 20:46:42 schrieb Pierre Morcello:
Hi,
I thought you were talking about a set of macros???
It is a set of macro because there is also a 'breakable if' and also 'breakable else'.
However, the idea is sufficient for me, I can just declare the macro myself
Yes, I can understand that : I used to do the same than boost::non_copiable.. But I don't want to keep good ideas for myself.
There is clearly no technical difficulties here. It's more declaring : "there is an interesting way of programming some tedius tasks that use if/else/ do while contructs everywhere".
I've never seen such a case anywhere, let alone everywhere. if you need a construct that forms a scope, accomplishes a tasks and then exists the scope from anywhere in between, that's a function. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost