On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba < vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Le 04/09/11 11:04, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. a écrit :
Yes, I can imagine a lot of repeated boilerplate from multiple users defining their own functors to do the same conversions. But I don't see any other way around the ODR issue without outlining strict usage patterns within the documentation of Conversion. I don't feel like Conversion's framework is currently very scalable: at some point, a user will want to use libraries C and D, each of which define conversions between typeA and typeB. At best, this will be detected at compile time, but regardless, you're hosed. Can we design Conversion to prevent this collision from happening?
I don't know if you have read this sectionHow can libraries define and use conversions between unrelated types? <https://svn.boost.org/svn/** boost/sandbox/conversion/libs/**conversion_ext/doc/html/boost/** conversion/users_guide.html#**boost.conversion.users_guide.** tutorial.proto<https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/conversion/libs/conversion_ext/doc/html/boost/conversion/users_guide.html#boost.conversion.users_guide.tutorial.proto>> (https://svn.boost.org/svn/**boost/sandbox/conversion/libs/** conversion_ext/doc/html/boost/**conversion/users_guide.html#** boost.conversion.users_guide.**tutorial.proto<https://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/conversion/libs/conversion_ext/doc/html/boost/conversion/users_guide.html#boost.conversion.users_guide.tutorial.proto> ).
Ah, okay, I did see this, but on a first pass it wasn't clear to me what was going on...a few more passes and now I understand. But you're right, this isn't a clean solution... - Jeff