Re: [boost] Re: Re: Re: 98% portable ptr<>

From: Larry Evans (jcampbell3_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-20 19:08:37

Philippe A. Bouchard wrote:

>"Larry Evans" <jcampbell3_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>  
>
>>Philippe A. Bouchard wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Partly specialized functions were converted to partly specialized
>>>      
>>>
>structures
>  
>
>>>in .../ptr/inherit2.cpp.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I'm sorry, I don't see how this matters.
>>    
>>
>
>Internal compiler error with gcc 2.95 (not standard C++).
>
OK.
[snip]

>  
>
>It doesn't really matter if SmartPtr<Top> is considered the same parent.
>ptr_base<Top, __false_type>::s_offset (former s_ptrdiff) will just be
>larger.  I personally feel comfortable with my design.
>
>  
>
But surely the smart pointer conversions should mirror the
dumb pointer conversions, and clearly, as the test shows,
this is not the case.  Unless you're referring to my latest
code which gets the correct values but also prints
the ambiguous message.  So which are you saying is correct,
you're latest ptr.hpp which doesn't mirror dumb pointer
conversion, or mine which does but gives the ambiguous
message?