From: Noah Stein (noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-06 21:17:00
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mfdylan [mailto:dylan_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 4:34 PM
> --- In boost_at_y..., "Andrei Alexandrescu" <andrewalex_at_h...> wrote:
> > I agree that a nicer default template argument mechanism (such as an
> > exclamation mark meaning, "use the default here") would make things
> > but by and large, I don't consider this to be a problem.
> Why exclamation mark? Surely just omitting it entirely would be
> my_vector<int,,range_checking> v;
> Is there any reason that would cause a parsing problem?
> Personally I'd like to see this extended to function calls too.
I like the idea of being able to accept default values anywhere one is
present. I think it would be preferable, though, to have an explicit
declaration of intent to use the default value instead of merely omitting
the argument. Since it is already a keyword, I would suggest using
"default" to specify an argument of default value.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk