Boost logo

Boost :

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, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at