From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-03-18 09:04:21
"Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk_at_[hidden]> writes:
> That change does not seem to make a difference. The compiler errors are still
> exactly the same.
Does 2.96 want the default argument (=0) to be repeated?
-- 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