Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-18 10:07:02

Hi Ed,

I'm curious about something. Of all the people with whom you've corresponded
about using operator[] in format, what percentage have immediately responded
positively to your view of operator[] as an analogy for projection?

I think op[] has some clear technical merits, but unless my antennae are
seriously mistuned, almost noboone thinks that it makes any sort of
"intuitive sense"... and that's not something you'll be able to convince
people of. It's like a joke: either they get it, or they don't. If they
don't get it, they won't laugh even if they understand you when you explain


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brey, Edward D" <EdwardDBrey_at_[hidden]>

> Interesting. I never looked at it this way. I would suspect that there
> would be very few cases where someone would get confused about the meaning
> in this way. However, if I'm wrong, it would be a good argument against
> operator[].

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at