"Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com> wrote in message news:d0am2b$7hu$1@sea.gmane.org...
Hi All,
I'm working on ways to make the Boost Interfaces library easier to use. This involves making interface definitions compile faster and making them easier to read. Unfortunately, these are somewhat conflicting goals: really messy-looking interface definitions may compile much faster than simple ones.
I'm working on four approaches to interface definitions; I plan to implement them all and then compare them. Right now I'm looking for feedback on number 4:
1. The current IDL, possibly slightly modified, in which an interface definition consists of a sequence of macro invocation 2. A modified IDL in which an interface definition consists of a single invocation; this increases the amount of preprocessor metaprogramming but decreases the amount of template metaprogramming 3. The pseudocode IDL, together with an IDL compiler which translates pseudocode definitions into C++ class definitions requiring virtually no metaprogramming.
I know you wanted feedback on #4, but please, please do not force upon us an IDL compiler. It complicates usage too much. // Johan