Hi Jonathan! ----- Mensaje original ----- De: Jonathan Turkanis <technews@kangaroologic.com> Fecha: Viernes, Marzo 4, 2005 0:08 am Asunto: [boost] Re: [congif] BOOST_BEFRIEND_TEMPLATE, BOOST_PRIVATE

JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote: [...]

...

The macros I'm using are:

...

BOOST_PRIVATE_IF_MEMBER_TEMPLATE_FRIENDS BOOST_PROTECTED_IF_MEMBER_TEMPLATE_FRIENDS

These would be okay with me. But sometimes I use a macro for specifying the type of derivation, and

struct derived_class : BOOST_PRIVATE_IF_MEMBER_TEMPLATE_FRIENDS base_class { };

seems a bit long.

Yep it is long, but BOOST_PRIVATE covers too much semantic scape: what if in the future a similar workaround is needed to make up for another, unrelated defficiency? This is not hypothetical, in fact I'm already using BOOST_MULTI_INDEX_PRIVATE_IF_USING_DECL_FOR_TEMPL_FUNCTIONS that does the same thing (turning private into public) in some compilers that do not support in-class using declarations for template functions. Admittedly, it'd be nicer if we can come up with a shorter, yet descriptive name. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo PS: OT: Jonathan, weren't you going to promote a scopeguard impl to boost/detail? I'm waiting for that so that I can reduce my own codebase :)