On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. < jeffrey.hellrung@gmail.com> wrote:
It would seem to me that, typically, removing a static_assert that would fail for a particular instantiation will just push the compiler errors further on down the code after the (removed) static_assert; i.e., the static_assert is only meant to catch compiler errors early and in a readable way.
Do you have a particular use case in mind?
It may be necessary to add primary templates to an implementation, with a
failing static assert inside, to allow everything to compile with incorrect types, and produce the error at runtime. At this point, I have successfully determined there is indeed interest, and I will be submitting an implementation with unit tests shortly. Regards, Ben Robinson, Ph.D.
- Jeff
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost