
23 Aug
2011
23 Aug
'11
6:02 p.m.
Am 23.08.2011 18:56, schrieb Vicente J. Botet Escriba: >> I don't like implicit conversions in the first place. This hasn't >> anything to do with the library itself. But providing implicit >> conversions can create temporary objects or make a program behave >> weird in the strangest places. Sometimes versions of overloaded >> functions are called, you wouldn't expect. Some stuff compiles, where >> you would rather have a compile time error than a runtime crash. I >> try to avoid implicit conversions and prefer handwritten conversion >> where neccessary. This way you will always know what's happening in >> your code. Therefore the library would not be of great use for me. >> I'm not against implicit conversions per se, but from my experience >> they should be used with great care. Using this library might suggest >> the opposite to the unexperienced user. > * What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library? > The library provides implicit and explicit conversions, and as you > have surely remarqued you need to use an explicit function to get them > (implicitly), so the conversion is not realy implicit. No risk for the > unexperienced user as it need to state explicitly that he want > implicit conversion ;-) Sorry, my fault. I didn't look into deeply enough. Best regards, Ralph.