Re: [boost] [QVM] Boost.QVM formal review is ongoing

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:46 PM, Rainer Deyke wrote:

...

Rainer, thank you for the thoughtful review! Just one comment below:

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Rainer Deyke wrote:

...

I also strongly feel that the comma operator should be replaced with function call syntax, i.e. X(v) instead of (v,X).

A friend of mine came up with the idea to implement swizzling and member access as a function call syntax, then in a separate header define that (v,XYZ) is equivalent to XYZ(v). This seems doable. Do you think that

On 17.12.2015 20:10, Emil Dotchevski wrote: this

...

is a reasonable compromise?

Yes.

Thanks. I'll wait for the review process to finish before making this change. Emil