On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Pedro Lamarão <pedro.lama...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > currently proposed C++ Coding Conventions imply a very strict > weird-is-forbidden style, which I like. > > But if defining new templates should in general be avoided, I'm unsure what > is the best path in converting VEC. > > VEC interface optimizes element acessors to copy primitive types and > point-to object types. > > If VEC is to be a template class, default accessors in C++ would naturally > return a (const-)reference-to anything. It would be possible to optimize > accessors to return a copy instead of a const-reference-to with enable_if. > All this would allow VEC to be mostly just one thing, with small variations > in corresponding to VEC_last and VEC_index. > > Since enable_if is not part of C++98, it would be added to GCC itself -- > perhaps in namespace gcc. > > This decision will not block work in the branch, of course -- VEC can be > converted first unoptimized and then reoptimized with whatever tricks are > allowed.
One of the requirements is that the code should bootstrap with any C++03 compiler. Another requirement is to keep template usage simple. Those two requirements to me mean avoid enable_if. Of course, maintainers will exercise judgment on specific cases, but as a general guideline, I would suggest to forget them. -- Gaby
