Re: [boost] Cxx dual library

3 Jun 2016

      On 6/3/2016 5:53 PM, Gottlob Frege wrote:
...
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Edward Diener  wrote:
...
On 6/2/2016 5:40 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:
...
Le 02/06/2016 à 20:55, Edward Diener a écrit :
...
I have finished all the main work on the Cxx dual library at
https://github.com/eldiener/cxx_dual. The library is also in the Boost
Library Incubator at
http://rrsd.com/blincubator.com/bi_library/cxx_dual-2/?gform_post_id=1597.
* Have you considered adding a new namespace and import the definitions
from either boost or the standard library, so that the use of macros
will be reduced and adding some non intrusive adaptation would be
possible?
No, because that leads to complications which are beyond the scope of what I
was trying to do. I am not as afraid of macros as you appear to be.
Luke: I won't fail you. I'm not afraid.
Yoda: You will be. You... will... be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzmpXz5d2z0
Sorry, couldn't resist.
The bad guys in the star wars fantasies are children compared to the 
bad guys of human history or even of the imagination of the greatest of 
creative artists ( of which George Lucas doesn't even begin to qualify ).

Sorry, couldn't resist.
...
Macros are evil.
Everyone to their own opinion <g>.

Much boilerplate C++ code has been created in Boost libraries using the 
facilities of Boost PP. My won Boost VMD adds to that ability for those 
who are interested. C++ macros are like any other language facility, 
valuable if used correctly, poor if misused.
...
I'd appreciate more work from a library author if it
meant less use of macros by the library users.  Even when I'm the
library author.
All CXXD does is just work ! I guess that must be evil.

I do point out in the doc potential problems using a macro-based 
solution. But I found it the easiest way to achieve what I wanted to do 
with the least amount of work on the end-user's part, so I opt for it 
for myself. I only hope others will find it as useful.