On 2/20/2011 10:13 AM, Paul Mensonides wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 09:47:02 -0500, Edward Diener wrote:
On 2/20/2011 7:09 AM, Paul Mensonides wrote:
In a general sense, I consider treating variadic content as a data structure as going in the wrong direction.
My goal is only to allow programmers to specify using variadic macros and then provide the means to convert that sequence to/from pp-lib data types. I have also provided the means to access any individual variadic token from the sequence as well as its length, but that hardly means "treating variadic content as a data structure" to me. As an additional convenience, and because of variadic macros, I also mimicked pp-lib tuple functionality without the need to pass the length of a tuple directly. My goal is simple usability of variadic data in connection with pp-lib.
I was merely expressing my thoughts related to the use of variadics in an overall sense, not whether something that converts __VA_ARGS__ to some other form is useful. The interface to your library is small enough that you could just add it to the pp-lib.
If during the review of my library the majority of other reviewers feel that they would like my library to be added to pp-lib I would be glad to do it if my library is accepted into Boost. If that happens I will check with you on the best way to do it, but I do not want to do anything right now in that direction considering that my library has not even been reviewed yet, does not have a review manager, and is still somewhere in a review queue where many other libraries are waiting for a review. Since you are the most knowledgable person regarding pp programming, if you would be willing to me the review manager for the library, that would be fine with me. It is certainly small enough and easy enough for anyone to understand, much less yourself who understand much more about the pp. Otherwise I am still looking for a review manager for the library when it comes up for review.