Le 03/05/13 12:01, Vicente J. Botet Escriba a écrit :
Hi,
on the GSoC discussion about Boost.Chrono/Date proposal we were discussing about date construction. Some of us think that we need to use named types for day, month, year and week so that the date constructors are not ambiguous. Everyone agree with the constant object for month.
date dt(year(2013), may, day(3));
But having to use day(3) or year(2013) seems to wordy.
I was wondering if we can not add some literals for day, year and week so that we can just write
date dt(2013y, may, 3d);
The advantage I see in addition to been less wordy, is that we will have a compile error when the year, day or week is out of range.
Oh I forget the drawbacks. As any other suffix it would need to add a using statement using boost::chrono::dates::literals; date dt(2013y, may, 3d); Are any standardized suffixes for day,week and year? Note that these are not the same as days, years, weeks. Best, Vicente