From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-12 21:50:06
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:uzn9hcgip.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> > [snip]
> >> Seems like this would be more useful.
> > Perhaps. Do you care to explain why?
> It works generically on lvalues and rvalues, so that if someone hands
> you a function object f, and some_algo is more efficient when it can
> modify its first argument in-place, you can do
> some_algo( mutate_rvalue(f(),0), x );
yeah, definitely an improvement, although I wish there was some way of
putting a static assertion in there. The new error message is a lot worse.
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