From: Dave Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-04-30 18:29:20
on 4/30/00 7:22 PM, Aleksey Gurtovoy at alexy_at_[hidden] wrote:
> I thought you've already settled on the removal of the 2-type templates
> versions without '2' at the end of names, and we are speaking only about
> backward compatibility.
What I've settled on doesn't clinch anything though. It belongs "to the
world" now ;)
> In other words, I missed the fact that
> implementation based on partial specialization has its own weight in context
> of writing generic code. It's really may be the most important argument,
> although at the moment I can't cite any concrete example either.
I'm waiting to hear from others at this point. I think we've made all the
arguments: it's backward compatibility and some as-yet-unidentified
usefulness for generic programming vs. simplicity and predictability.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk