Re: [boost] Re: is_base_and_derived explanation?

From: Terje Slettebø (tslettebo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-01 15:49:54

>From: "Rani Sharoni" <rani_sharoni_at_[hidden]>

> "John Maddock" <john_maddock_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:012801c2c9eb$d07c4da0$b2e5193e_at_1016031671...
> > OK the new version of is_base_and_derived is checked in, along with
> stricter
> > test cases, can someone who understands the implementation (I'm
absolutely
> > sure that I don't !), please provide an explanation to add to the
header?
> >
> > BTW I have looked at Terje's explanation, but the subtle changes to the
> > Rani's implementation make in no longer quite applicable (although I may
> > be missing something).
>
> Terje's fine explanation holds (just change reference to pointer).
> I think that link to the original c.l.c++.m posting might be helpful
> especially because it contains a link to an explanation by probably the
most
> authorized person in C++ overloading - Steve Adamczyk.
>
> The c.l.c++.m posting -
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=df893da6.0301280859.522081f7%40posting.
google.com

Thanks for the compliment, but the explanation was written in a rather
informal way. However, it could be used as a basis for understanding how it
works, to then write an explanation for it. Also, I used an example of
multiple bases in the explanation, while the formal explanation should
probably be more general.

I've looked at the CVS version, and I see that it's like Rani says - the
explanation still holds, just changing reference to pointer.

I also included the above link in the explanation. However, as the link to
Daveeds posting from that one uses the link http://tinyurl.com/502f, this
might not be that lasting, so it could be good to include the original link
that this one points to, as well.

Regards,

Terje