On 6/30/2014 4:37 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
On 6/30/14, 11:44 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
On 30/06/2014 12:40 p.m., Edward Diener wrote:
On 6/30/2014 11:15 AM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
On 30/06/2014 09:26 a.m., Edward Diener wrote:
The documentation for fusion implies that FUSION_MAX_MAP_SIZE is defined whenever a fusion header is included.
It doesn't, it simply reserves the option for any header to define it or include a header that does. This is the general case for max sizes, and allows fusion to do things as implementing a container in terms of a different one.
What fusion header needs to be included in order to bring in the definition for FUSION_MAX_MAP_SIZE ?
As far as I can tell, `FUSION_MAX_MAP_SIZE` is only defined if you include
and the implementation is non-variadic. What do you mean by 'and the implementation is non-variadic' ?
If the compiler has enough C++11 support, you'll get a variadic implementation:
template
struct map; For such implementation, `FUSION_MAX_MAP_SIZE` makes no sense as there is no hard limit.
Yes, that is correct.
I created a pull request for msm to fix the problem there when fusion uses variadic maps and msm attempts to use FUSION_MAX_MAP_SIZE. But it would still be nice if fusion documented this situation.