From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-19 11:19:33
In that case, is there any objection to accepting the version of
smart_ptr.hpp recently posted by Peter Dimov as the official version?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 11:48 AM
Subject: RE: [boost] shared_ptr hierarchy question
> > If that is the only problem, then it is indeed not specific to member
> > templates at all. But please, can someone recall the /specific/
> > which resulted in our not enabling member templates for
> > smart_ptr.hpp with MSVC?
> Here's some messages from the thread "MSVC template weirdness" (these deal
> with template issues of several kinds with MSVC -- not just member
> However, in this case, I don't think any of them apply, except we need to
> define the template versions before non-template versions.
> The decision to define BOOST_NO_MEMBER_TEMPLATES and also define
> BOOST_MSVC6_MEMBER_TEMPLATES was made at:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk