Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » U++ Library support » U++ Core » NEW: generic Toupel grouper
Re: NEW: generic Toupel grouper [message #28064 is a reply to message #28053] Sat, 14 August 2010 11:53 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
dolik.rce wrote on Fri, 13 August 2010 14:21

The boost implementation is really overkill. But one thing I like about it is the "indexed" access using the get<N>() function.

Also, something like
//for Two (similar for bigger touples):
	Value operator[](int i)const{
		ASSERT(i>=0&&i<2);
		if(i==0) return a;
		else return b;
	}
would be nice thing to have.

Honza


You expect too much about types involved here IMO.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Date limited to 2020 and 2015 does not work ?!?
Next Topic: Value question (memory consumption)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Apr 27 14:21:18 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01286 seconds