From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-31 12:10:10
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 09:12:58 -0700, "Jonathan Turkanis"
>Well, I can't really argue with that. But it seemes that a conforming
>implementation would be better than a non-conforming one.
Oh yes, I didn't imply that a non-conforming implementation is more
lines or more useful :) Just that this is really a small facility; I
like it, but more because I'm a C++ fan than because of its actual
applications (we must admit that sometimes :)) That said, I would like
to see it into boost, but only in its own header, without odd medleys
with, say, container_traits or other extensive libraries.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk