Boost logo

Boost :

From: Dave Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-12-30 19:29:10

Beman wrote:
> At 05:10 PM 12/26/99 -0500, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>The lines to which you refer are:
>> private:
>>It seems to me that it ought to be changed to
>> private:
> I don't see that. The point of making the privates public was to
> allow member templates to work even when member template friends
> didn't. So what is the point if there are no member templates at
> all? Or am I missing something?

If member templates are not supported, the private data members should stay
private. We only need to make them public when member templates are
supported AND member template friends are unsupported. To rephrase, we want
to make them private if member templates are unsupported OR member template
friends are not unsupported.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at