From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-11-17 15:54:41
At 12:50 PM 11/17/99 -0600, Ed Brey wrote:
>This leaves open the issue of the specialization of the classes for
>non-commutative operators, that is all the operators for which
>reversing operands changes semantics. The classes in question are
>those that have only one friend: subtractable, dividable, and
>modable. AFAICT, none of these classes need specialization, because
>there is never any ambiguity for them.
AFAIK, that is correct, and works correctly with GCC and CodeWarrior,
but it is up to Dave to make the call.
>One more issue: divideable is spelled wrong; should be dividable.
My American Heritage Dictionary does spell it "dividable", but again,
it is up to Dave.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk