Re: [boost] Re: Re: Deadline for the Standard Library TechnicalReport

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-28 14:40:47

"David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> writes:

> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:000d01c2c6f3$85038c30$1d00a8c0_at_pdimov2...
>> [...]
>> By the way, the current typedef template proposal prohibits deduction;
>> this makes it less attractive for creating subpointers.
>
> Ouch!  Is this due to complexity issues, or was it just not deemed useful??

It's hard to say why, exactly, but my sense of it was that it was done
because it was easy to specify semantics that were identical to those
of the existing metafunction-form workaround.

I didn't have the presence-of-mind to raise an objection at that time,
but I think I'd be inclined to, now.

-- 
                       David Abrahams
   dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution