From: jhrwalter (walter_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-24 05:34:14
--- In boost_at_y..., Toon Knapen <toon.knapen_at_s...> wrote:
> jhrwalter wrote:
> >>Basically, just use a function like this:
> >> template<int N> ... size(Int<N>);
> >>Works in MSVC++ 6 and has neat syntax.
> > How do you like the idea of using free functions like
> > template<class M, int N>
> > size_t size (const M &m, int<N>);
> > for these operations instead?
> I would find it less intuitive.
> Would a free function be possible in MSVC, but a template member
> function would not ? (I'm not familiar with MSVC)
On the long run I see two options: MSVC gets more standard conforming
or we'll have to consider dropping MSVC compatibility to use more
In the meantime free functions could be an easy way to achieve some
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk