sob., 11 lis 2023 o 13:06 Nikl Kelbon <kelbonage_at_[hidden]> napisał(a):
>
> > There was even
>
> 'was' =(
> > real life examples/problems
>
> There are example from nlohmann json, magic enum, i use it for my de/serialization in personal project
>
> > the good old X Macro
>
> As you see no one uses this 'good old' technique, no nlohmann json, no boost preprocessor. Because this do not solve those problems
>

And maybe this is a problem? You did not analyze how each solution
works and what drawbacks have.
You should make "Tony tables" of each possible solution that show that
your proposal is superior to old ones.
And use some concrete examples from real life code to prove your point.

Besides, some problems you presented could be solved by static
reflection, and you need to consider this in your paper too.


> сб, 11 нояб. 2023 г. в 01:00, Marcin Jaczewski <marcinjaczewski86_at_[hidden]>:
>>
>> pt., 10 lis 2023 o 13:42 Nikl Kelbon via Std-Proposals
>> <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> napisał(a):
>> >
>> > Here is examples, recursion stops when `__VA_OPT__` will not expands (`__VA_ARGS__` empty), In case on infitine recursion there are impl-defined limit
>> >
>> > implementation and discurssion here:
>> > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65851
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Could you provide more real life examples/problems where this could be useful?
>> In your pdf the only example of this was `tie_aggregate` but
>> this was more of a problem in C++ than
>> something that should be fixed by macros.
>> There was even a proposal that had a proper solution for this:
>>
>> ```
>> auto [...pack] = aggregate;
>> ```
>>
>> Another thing is how your proposal is better than the good old X Macro
>> technique?
>>
>>
>>
>> > пт, 10 нояб. 2023 г. в 16:37, Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]>:
>> >>
>> >> On 11/10/23 15:22, Nikl Kelbon via Std-Proposals wrote:
>> >> > Hi all, I would like to propose a minor addition to the preprocessor,
>> >> > that has the potencial to significantly simplify writing and reading
>> >> > macros, give new features that were not there.
>> >> >
>> >> > I propose a special token '__THIS_MACRO__'(similar to '__VA_ARGS__' and
>> >> > '__VA_OPT__' ), which will add the possibility to write recursive macros.
>> >> >
>> >> > Simple example:
>> >> >
>> >> > #define fold_right( op , head , ...) \
>> >> > ( head __VA_OPT__ ( op __THIS_MACRO__(op, __VA_ARGS__ )))
>> >> > /* expands to (1 + (2 + (3))) */
>> >> > int i = fold_right(+ , 1 , 2 , 3 );
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > This can be used in many different scenarios,
>> >> > * declaring enums with enum info(like names, count, etc)
>> >> > * boost describe struct
>> >> > * ... more examples in 'pdf' ...
>> >>
>> >> When does the recursion stop? IOW, what one is supposed to write in the
>> >> macro definition to stop the recursion at a certain point?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> >> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> >> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>> >
>> > --
>> > Std-Proposals mailing list
>> > Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> > https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals