From: John Harris (TT) (john.harris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-22 09:58:06
I think the template constructor for boost::any is too general. I ran into
the problem while trying to overload
ostream&operator<<(ostream&, const boost::any&)
If I try to do this, then all types are automatically included in this
overload (because boost::any can be constructed from any type).
I want to provide support for only a couple of types in my overload, and
because of my architecture, I have to have this overload.
Is there any reason not to have boost::any::any() be explicit?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk