----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org>; <boost-users@lists.boost.org> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 1:30 PM Subject: [boost] [review][constrained_value] Review of Constrained Value Library begins today Hi, what do you think about replacing the typedef by a specific class so instead of writing bounded<int>::type v; we write bounded<int> v; The advantage to have a specific class (see below) is that it allows to add specific members that have a sens, e. g. change_lower_bound can be added to bounded<int, int, int> but not to bounded_int<int, 0, 100>. The liability is that we need to repeat a lot of constructors. Of course this can be done by the user itself as constrained is a public class but at the end what is more important is the user interface. This technique has already been used at least on Boost.MultiIndex and Boost.Flyweight. Best regards, Vicente ================================================ /// The class of constrained for bounded object types (using within_bounds constraint policy). template < typename ValueType, typename LowerType = ValueType, typename UpperType = LowerType, typename ErrorPolicy = throw_exception<>, typename LowerExclType = boost::mpl::false_, typename UpperExclType = LowerExclType, typename CompareType = std::less<ValueType>
struct bounded : constrained< ValueType, within_bounds< LowerType, UpperType, LowerExclType, UpperExclType, CompareType >, ErrorPolicy > { /// The basetype-typedef alias. typedef constrained< ValueType, within_bounds< LowerType, UpperType, LowerExclType, UpperExclType, CompareType >, ErrorPolicy > basetype; // add all the constructors and specific functions // ... };