From: Ian Whittley (imw_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-26 09:09:34
> > If 'get_pointer' is going to become a free-standing equivalent of 'get'
> > member function, I would suggest to call it 'c_ptr' (never liked 'get'
> > e.g.
>What is "c_" supposed to mean? Can we see what the unabbreviated version
Surely it just means a bare c-style pointer? so c_ means C :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk