From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-04 11:32:35
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Moore" <gustav_at_[hidden]>
> I'm trying to recall... Found it. Attached is the message where I
described the issue. I guess there should be a comment in the code.
> How about
> // It is necessary to use a free type T for the first parameter, in order
> // to work around a (possible) bug in Microsoft C's implementation
> // of template type deduction. As this form of the code should work
> // correctly on any compiler, there is no need to conditionalise it
> // for MSVC only.
> Could you add this comment to CVS for me, Dave? (You have CVS access,
don't you?) (The "should work correctly" comment is a bit harsh, in the
light of your comments on the Intel compiler, if you can think of a better
wording, or a better implementation given that the obvious one doesn't work,
let me know).
Sorry, not today. I'm finished with CVS for the day and must sign off. Ask
again tomorrow ;-)
Here's another question: why didn't we put abs(rational<X>) in the global
namespace for compilers with partial ordering but without argument dependent
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk