Mostafa-6 wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2011 11:47:12 -0700, Lorenzo Caminiti <lorcaminiti@gmail.com> wrote:
Boost will require this macro to be named BOOST_LOCAL_WITH_DEFAULT even if it is controlled by the BOOST_LOCAL_ENABLE_BOOST_LOCAL_[VARIADIC/SEQUENCING]_WITH_DEFAULT switch: http://www.boost.org/development/requirements.html#Design_and_Programming
Oh, ok, I now see what you're saying. Thanks for the clarification.
I found this macro names to be longer and less readable than ", default x" or ")(default x" so I decided not to add BOOST_LOCAL_WITH_DEFAULT to the library defined macros. I simply to suggest in the library docs that programmers can define this macro if they find it readable. If during the review also other programmers request to add BOOST_LOCAL_WITH_DEFAULT, I am happy to consider it.
Yes, given your earlier clarification, I agree with you on the readability issue. However, I still see a use case for it, not as is, rather, the case where clients would just alias to WITH_DEFAULT.
Even if defining macros as follow might "feel" strange to programmers because of the leading "," or ")(": #define WITH_DEFAULT , default // (1) or: #define WITH_DEFAULT )(default // (2) The leading ", default ..." and ")(default ..." is part of Boost.Local public API so I think that Boost.Local users should be expected to be familiar with it. Therefore, I don't see a need for aliasing WITH_DEFAULT to a pre-defined BOOST_LOCAL_WITH_DEFAULT macro: #define WITH_DEFAULT BOOST_LOCAL_WITH_DEFAULT // (3) I would just expect programmers to define (1) or (2) directly if they feel these are more readable than using ", default ..." or ")(default ..." (I personally find the WITH_DEFAULT macro not useful at all but I am very used to use the "default" syntax). BTW, based on our discussion, I will add (2) to the library docs for completeness (right now only (1) is mentioned).
So please consider this my request for such an addition, in case I forget/don't participate in the review.
Yes, let's discuss more during the review together with other people that will be experimenting with the library. Thanks, --Lorenzo -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/local-Review-request-tp3522996p3526206.ht... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.