|
|
Boost : |
From: Miles Bader (miles_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-07 10:00:15
"Marco Costalba" <mcostalba_at_[hidden]> writes:
> boost::overload<Signatures> f;
>
> // assign functions in any order
> f.add_overload(foo4);
Given that the entire point is to hold overloads, isn't "add_overload" a
bit redundant? Why not just "add"?
-Miles
-- .Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk