On 05/07/11 10:35, Edward Diener wrote:
2) Further to the above, I wonder if it's worthwhile providing a set of "standard" introspection classes for the common cases, a straw man list would be something like:
Types: type, value_type, size_type, difference_type, iterator, const_iterator, pointer, const_pointer, reference, const_reference. Static Values: value Functions: begin(), end(), swap(self_type)
That can be easily done once it is determined what to cover.
metafunctions for preexisting concepts could be nice. Bonsu point if they live in a tti/std/???.hpp set of files. Basically w/e testing for Container, Range and other common concepts should be enough.
I'm also thinking that what folks really want to know is: "Is there a function named X, that can be called with arguments of types A, B and C". It would be interesting to see how far along this road we could actually get?
I think Eric Niebler is the expert in this area regarding non-nested functions. But if he and others with more knowledge of determining this for free functions would be willing to help me I can certainly look at it in the future. I just do not think it belongs in this particular library as I conceive of it presently.
I think i has one in my previous attempt at this kind of library but it didnt make its way to my github. Th trick I used was to define a function with the same name in the global namespace which prototype being: non_found_type Name( ... ); // Actual ellipsis As f(...) is the last resort in there of overload, testing calling Name( some args ) and checking the return type was not not_found_type, you know if Ret Name(Tn....) exists as a free function.