From: Peter Simons (simons_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-22 07:54:01
David Rasmussen writes:
> When do you think it'll be added to Boost?
I didn't really persue the goal of getting it approved yet, because I
still want to make a few modifications. I am not very happy with the
"Incrementor" class, because I feel that the semantics are more
complicated than they could be. Also, I am no longer convinced that
smart_enum<> should actually _contain_ its Incrementor; maybe it would
be better to derive from it ... Maybe it would be even better to use a
"traits" approach instead of a policy.
Unfortunately, these things are hard to decide without making an
implementation of it, and that is -- as always -- a matter of spare
I'm definitely open to any suggestions or ideas!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk