Re: [boost] Re: in/out parameters, codingstylesandmaintenance

From: Justin M. Lewis (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-04 05:44:34

This is what I came up with real quick.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/in_out/test1/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gregory Colvin" <gregory.colvin_at_[hidden]>
To: "Boost mailing list" <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: in/out parameters, codingstylesandmaintenance

> Code, please.
>
> On Saturday, May 3, 2003, at 22:18 America/Denver, Justin M. Lewis
> wrote:
>
> > Or, how about polymorphic types, where you can't simply create the
> > object
> > internally in the function, where you HAVE to deal with what's passed
> > in in
> > one way or another.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gregory Colvin" <gregory.colvin_at_[hidden]>
> > To: "Boost mailing list" <boost_at_[hidden]>
> > Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 9:15 PM
> > Subject: Re: [boost] Re: in/out parameters, codingstylesandmaintenance
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Saturday, May 3, 2003, at 22:03 America/Denver, Noel Yap wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gregory Colvin wrote:
> >>>> Anyway, I jumped into this thread mainly to opine that Noel's
> >>>> suggestions
> >>>> were not, so far as I could see, any better than your proposal, not
> >>>> to
> >>>> rehash what we have already discussed.
> >>>
> >>> I think that if ref<> were used instead of dumb_ptr<> in my previous
> >>> posts, it's a little better since, IIRC, ref<> already exists.
> >>
> >> A little.  But so far Justin's examples don't require it.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Unsubscribe & other changes:
> > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>