From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (alexy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-07 04:05:40
David Abrahams wrote:
> I think a better choice might be boost::type<void>. We could
> then use a little metaprogram to detect it and replace the type
> with void where it really counts.
Yes, I thought about it too, but I was not sure about worthiness of this,
and then I realized that the requirements spelled in the standard probably
force us to get rid of these default parameters anyway.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk