Re: [boost] About all these metaprogramming libraries

On 3/19/17 12:31, Bruno Dutra via Boost wrote:

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Oswin Krause < Oswin.Krause@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:

...

On 2017-03-19 17:13, Bruno Dutra via Boost wrote:

...

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 4:22 PM, degski via Boost wrote:

<snip features and criticisms of various libraries>

You've pretty much described Metal, except that Metal requires lists to be specializations of metal::list, but that is far from a shortcoming, in fact there is a very good reason behind that design choice.

<snip more things why-I-designed-my-library-this-way> Here is a suggestions. I don't think this thread is the place for the authors to explain the benefits of their design/implementation/usage. There will be a lot of time for that. In this thread, we are trying (as a community) to figure out the best approach to deal with multiple submissions of TMP libraries. Lets concentrate on that concern. Don't worry ... there will be plenty of opportunity for critique and defense (o; michael -- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com