28 Sep
2017
28 Sep
'17
12:02 p.m.
Den 28-09-2017 kl. 13:56 skrev degski via Boost:
On 28 September 2017 at 13:52, Thorsten Ottosen via Boost < boost@lists.boost.org> wrote:
How is that better? Then I have to look up the documentation to understand how big the segment is...
As, in my mind it's all constexpr, we can have member function segment_size () at zero run-time cost, no need to look things up. It (the policy) also simply generalises what's already current practice.
I'm talking about reading the actual code and having that code being self-documenting wrt. the size of the segment. kind regards -Thorsten