From: Noel Yap (Noel.Yap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-23 20:32:33
"Justin M. Lewis" wrote:
> Yes, it is better.
> The first example has the problem of, you still have to go look up the
> function to see if it's actually changing anything, or if it's taking the
> param in, reading teh value, then modifying based on what was read.
Then how about:
boost::tuple< boost::shared_ptr< LargeObject > > result = f(
> The second example has the problem of copying a potentially large object,
> and it doesn't allow for in/out params.
I'm still not convinced that in/out parameters are necessary.
-- NOTICE: If received in error, please destroy and notify sender. Sender does not waive confidentiality or privilege, and use is prohibited.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk