Re: Re: [C++-sig] [Implementation] Calling wrapped functions, converters, policies

At 18:40 2003-09-21, David Abrahams wrote:
>Daniel Wallin <[email protected]> writes:
> > This is something I'd like to avoid since it complicates the concept
> > for policies a lot.
>
>Just call your thing something else.  ArgumentPolicies?  I don't care.
>There's no reason inheritance has to be used for composition.  I don't
>even like it all that much, but it has distinct advantages in terms of
>the EBO.

I don't get this. What is "my thing"? And why should I call it something else?

>Regardless, to produce any single entity (type, object, etc.) which is
>shared by all arguments, you're going to need some protocol which
>determines how it's composed.  Each ArgumentPolicy needs to get a
>crack at modifying the type somehow.  As I've been saying, *I want to
>deal with those issues at a different level of abstraction*.  We don't
>need to think about it at the level of function invocation; we can
>just assume that the ArgumentPackage type has been constructed at that
>point.  It's the issues of how composition works that complicates
>things, so let's not make it an issue for CallPolicies, OK?

Ok.

---
Daniel Wallin



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf