From: Andrei Alexandrescu (andrewalex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-25 22:33:32
> About 6 months ago I did an implementation of dynamic and static bitset
> classes where almost all of the functionality was factored into a common
> base class. That could be easily converted into a single class with a
> parameter. However, I did not bring that up when talking with Chuck, or
> submission to Boost, because the C++ standard already has std::bitset, and
> thought it would be simpler to have something that is a pure addition
> instead of something that replaces what's already there and then also
> an extension. Does that make sense?
I guess it would be cool if the policy-based class would use std::bitset
(and propagate its functionality) as a policy (or at least backend).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk