From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-21 10:02:23
Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
> | I disagree with your conclusion. As I've said elsewhere, &k can be a
> | compile-time constant in the same way that &X::k is a compile-time
> | constant.
> Certainly, you've said that. But that assertion by itself does not
> constitute a proof of the well-foundness of the attempted analogy or
> whether the analogy actually constitutes a proof.
It's not intended to be proof in the mathematical sense; I doubt I
have the energy for that ;-), though I think MSVC probably constitutes
an existence proof.
I'm hoping people will "just see" that it's possible based on what
I've said. I doubt I can explain it any better than I have at this
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk