Boost logo

Boost :

From: Daniel Frey (daniel.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-25 13:53:33

David Abrahams wrote:
> Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > That won't work as you made it a nested struct so it is still different
> > for all instantiations. I think Dave meant to go for this one:
> Yup, that's what I meant. BTW, so this safe_bool thing can get
> further re-used it might make sense to make a special friend class
> which just has access to the type... or at that point, just make the
> type publicly accessible.

Can you elaborate a bit? I imagine that although the technical
implementation might be identical, the sematics of the names could be a
problem. Helping the compiler to remove unneeded instantiations is a
good thing, but it shouldn't affect readability, so I'd like to see some
more concrete uses and whether we can use safe_bool (or any other name)
that matches all these "typical" uses.

Regards, Daniel

Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology
Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: +49 (0)241 936737-42, fax: +49 (0)241 936737-99
eMail: daniel.frey_at_[hidden], web:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at