From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25310 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2004 18:20:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 25276 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2004 18:20:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO uniton.integrable-solutions.net) (62.212.99.186) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 19 Jan 2004 18:20:52 -0000 Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id i0JIEL9b009863 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:14:21 +0100 Received: (from gdr@localhost) by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id i0JIELH0009862; Mon, 19 Jan 2004 19:14:21 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: uniton.integrable-solutions.net: gdr set sender to gdr@integrable-solutions.net using -f To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: gcc 3.5 integration branch proposal References: <16396.1201.530000.430277@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <400C17CD.5080408@gnat.com> <400C1DB9.2020600@coyotegulch.com> From: Gabriel Dos Reis In-Reply-To: <400C1DB9.2020600@coyotegulch.com> Organization: Integrable Solutions Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01336.txt.bz2 Scott Robert Ladd writes: | Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > (But, I'm afraid there will be some divergence on what "typical" means. | > Do we consider Gerald's testcase typical? Do we consider template | > constructs found in Boot typical?). | | Assuming you mean "Boost" above -- no, I don't consider template | gymnastics to be normal. Pathological, perhaps, but not normal. Yes I meant "Boost". I also suspect that it has wide acceptance in the C++ community. | In the interest of disclosure, I should not that I spent yesterday | writing a very complex set of template metaprograms -- which, while | necessary for performance, were also pathological and abnormal, | IMHO. ;) I suspect that we all end up somewhere writing those "pathological and abnormal" template constructs in typical codes ;- ) -- Gaby