<snip>
Thanks ! Very clever. The self() idea is very worthy, and I may steal it for my own idea/implementation about "property" in C++, which I have been working on indefinitely ( may never get completed to my satisfaction ). The metaprogramming is breathtaking, if I can slowly figure it out <g> . In my own implementation a "property" does not need to be nested class but can exist as a global/static object, so I don't know how I can use your self() idea but I really appreciate your doing it and publishing it.
Thank you :) It would be very interesting to look at your implementation to see how you tackle the problem. Have you posted your code anywhere that I can look? Actually, the property implementation does not have to be a nested class. The following: template<typename Base> class Property_Length : public Base { public: const double& get() const { return sqrt( Base::self()->X*Base::self()->X+ Base::self()->Y*Base::self()->Y+ Base::self()->Z*Base::self()->Z ); } }; template<typename Base> class Property_Double : public Base { public: const double& get() const {return m_arg;} void set(const double& arg) {m_arg=arg;} private: double m_arg; }; class Vector { public: BOOST_PROPERTY(Vector,Property_Double,X); BOOST_PROPERTY(Vector,Property_Double,Y); BOOST_PROPERTY(Vector,Property_Double,Z); BOOST_PROPERTY(Vector,Property_Length,Length); }; is legal. (but untested.) Regards Peder
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost