1 Apr
2015
1 Apr
'15
2:43 a.m.
Eric Niebler wrote: On 3/31/2015 4:26 PM, Robert Ramey wrote: ...
But don't we already have MPL1 for that? If one has to make MPL2 more complex to support MPL1 - wouldn't that defeat the whole point of the project?
Which is exactly why I don't see the point in writing an MPL clone.
There isn't much point in writing a C++11 MPL clone, because the idiomatic way to do metaprogramming in C++11 is different. This is why I'm saying that C++03 support is significant for MPL2.