Re: [boost] Re: Thoughts on class "any"

From: Kevlin Henney (kevlin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-09-05 09:02:25

In message <8p2til+gkhg_at_[hidden]>, William Kempf <sirwillard_at_my-
deja.com> writes
>> Definitely not ;-) Although, with hindsight I could be persuaded to
>> return to "type".
>
>I like type() better myself, for whatever my opinion is worth.

Must admit that I'm slowly coming round to that view (again) myself.

>><lament>why, oh, why can't we have partial specialization of function
>> templates?!</lament>
>
>I don't know, but it's trivial to work around this.  Have the 
>template function be a simple wrapper around a functor, which can be 
>partially specialized (on those compilers that allow it).

Yeah, the workaround is known, but it's always nicer to work through!
____________________________________________________________

  Kevlin Henney                   phone:  [phone]
  Curbralan Limited               mobile: [phone]
  mailto:kevlin_at_[hidden]     fax:    [phone]
  http://www.curbralan.com
____________________________________________________________