David Abrahams wrote:
"John Maddock" <john@johnmaddock.co.uk> writes:
Most of the type traits are designed to do something legal and reasonable even when doing the right thing is impossible, e.g.
remove_pointer<shared_ptr<T> >::type
is designed to be shared_ptr<T>. If rank does somthing similar, like return zero when not passed a true array, then specializing it could break libraries. Besides which, it's just conceptually wrong ;-)
I actually agree with this.
So.... why not create your own traits class, call it rank if you want, place it in your projects own namespace, and have the primary template inherit from boost::rank. Does that make sense?
That sounds sensible.
will do that. Since type_traits is in TR1 and thus has a lot of visibility, I prefer to be close to the terminology used in the type-traits when rolling my own traits because this will be more intuitive for the users. So that's why I first thought about extending the type_traits::rank, but since I have to agree with Dave, now will go for solution John proposed. thanks, toon