"Korcan Hussein" <korcan_h@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:djg7t5$li$1@sea.gmane.org...
"Larry Evans" <cppljevans@cox-internet.com> wrote in message news:435B9E00.3030607@cox-internet.com...
On 10/22/2005 06:58 AM, Larry Evans wrote: Are you suggesting this as an alternative to Spirit subrules?
Doesn't need to replace subrules but could be an alternative implementation for them, if you read the part:
[qoute] ... It might not be apparent but behind the scenes, plain rules are actually implemented using a pointer to a runtime polymorphic abstract class that holds the dynamic type of the parser assigned to it. When a Spirit expression is assigned to a rule, its type is encapsulated in a concrete subclass of the abstract class. A virtual parse function delegates the parsing to the encapsulated object. Rules have drawbacks though:
It is coupled to a specific scanner type. The rule is tied to a specific scanner [see The Scanner Business]. The rule's parse member function has a virtual function call overhead that cannot be inlined.
[/quote]
That is what automatic type erasing is, i think there is an alternative to this that might be worth investigating if not done so already. I'm just on the verge of finishing make my (simple, primitive) example tidy, should be up in a thew hours.
I made a mistake there, that was about rules :/ well i'm not sure how subrules i implementated but this could be an alternative implementation for rules i suppose.