x3::variant vs boost::variant

Baptiste Wicht <[email protected]> Sat, 30 Jan 2016 10:24:38 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.parsers.spirit.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi guys,

I just tested compiling my X3 parser with Boost 1.59 and it worked like
a charm :)

Now, I'll start using my real AST instead of the nodes I've written to
test X3.

I'm having a problem at this point with variant types. My old AST use
boost::variant and recursive_wrapper while my new AST use x3::variant
and forward_ast.

The new way (especially getting rid of recursive_wrapper) is nicer in my
opinion, so I tried adapting my tree to use x3::variant and forward_ast,
but it seems that a lot of code will need to be changed :( I found at
least issues with operator<< (easily fixable). And apparently you cannot
construct a x3::variant<x1,x2> from a x2. That seems really extreme
since I'm doing that all over the place with boost::variant.

It seems that X3 don't mind boost::variant and recursive_wrapper, so
what would be the advantages of using x3::variant and forward_ast ?

Thanks

Baptiste

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140

_______________________________________________
Spirit-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spirit-general

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 801 B)