...but the whole design looks still overengineered. See #388
- should get rid of the explicit specialisation
- always use a function signature and thus have arguments?
- why inheriting from the wrapper?
still puzzled why this instantiation of MultiFact fails to compile with GCC 4.8
so I'm bound to understand why the types involved
need indeed to be are structured the way they are right now.
previous versions used to resolve this ambiguity in favour of a ctor call,
but now the compiler treats such constructs as function definition;
this is reasonable, since C++11 introduced the notion of a "generalised
initialisation", which is always written as a (possibly empty) list
in braces.
In these specific cases here, we just omit the empty parens
right now we have to defeat an unfortunate static assertion in
the standard library, which is expected to go away in the future.
We use a hack to hijack the problematic definition with the preprocessor,
which requires our header to be first.
In the November developer meeting, Christian and I agreed that
it's best to remove that offending LUID specifications altogether.
Those embedded LUIDs where one of the issues blocking the transition to C++11
to make them stand out more prominently, some entity comments
where started with a line of starts. Unfortunately, doxygen
(and javadoc) only recogise comments which are started exactly
with /**
This caused quite some comments to be ignored by doxygen.
Credits to Hendrik Boom for spotting this problem!
A workaround is to end the line of stars with *//**
lib::Depend<TY> works as drop-in replacement for lib::Singleton<TY>
This changeset removes the convoluted special cases like
SingletonSub and MockInjector.
This is kind of a workaround to avoid having to maintain two variants.
Explanation: between Boost 1.42 and 1.52 there was the transition to a
reworked version of the filesystem library, itroducing some breaking changes
The new version distinguishes much clearer between the native and the
generic representation of paths -- which becomes relevant when porting
to non-POXIX operating systems.
Actually the intention was to use the generic path representation in all
configuration; currently this distinction is moot, since we're caring
only for POSIX systems.
So the workaround is to use the fsys::path::string() function, which
is available in both versions, but changed meaning to yield the native
string. Later, when able to deprecate older Boost versions, we should
switch to generic_string()
Note: an alternative solution was found by Mike Fisher in 3b39f35
using the compiletime define BOOST_FILESYSTEM_VERSION=2
See also ticket #896
now this library doesn't refer to any symbols from
Proc-Layer anymore. Resolving these problems
highlighted IMHO a serious shortcomming of our
interface system, which hinders the building
of abstractions at interface level
there is now a mechanism to allow sprcialised queries
to generate this syntactic representation only on demand
The actual concrete representation e.g. for scope queries
still remains TODO, but this won't really change
until we target the integration of a real resoloution engine
...to extract the syntetic ordering from
DefsRegistry and make that a responsibility
of the (internal) syntactic representation
of the query.
doesn't pass the compiler yet
effectively this joins the two existing lines
of "Query" classes into one systematic representation
Next step would be to move all mutation operations
over to the Query::Builder
time handling is part of the library, while this
convenience shortcut relies on the Advice system,
which resides in the application lib.
To allow this kind of symbolic acces to a grid
entity defined "elesewhere", client code needs
to be linked against liblumieracore.so
especially this allows to use the Advice system
or the query resolvers from within library facilities
to refer to other implementation level services by name
the rules-based configuration and query system
will be located within the core application,
while the concrete implementation facilities
are expected to reside within the session or
maybe also the GUI.
This is kind of a 'rochade' refactoring to resolve
circular library dependencies and confine the parts
dependant on the session and MObjects to the Proc-Layer
And while we're in the middle of chainsaw surgery,
we'll concentrate further query-based facilities
alongside the config-rules within the App core.
