From: Daniel Spangenberg (dsp_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-19 07:16:45
Daniel Frey schrieb:
> You are correct. It's on my ToDo-list and I will take care of it along
> with some other changes that I would like to make to the documentation
> (mostly restructuring). Currently, my time doesn't permit much work on
> it, but if you'd like to speed things up, I suggest you supply a patch
> for it. Otherwise, I guess you have to wait at least until October :)
> Regards, Daniel
Thanks for your answer. I just wanted to check whether it were forgotten
or not, because I know that many things are parallely done by all of you,
which naturally leads to the problem, that some of the minor important
points could fall through!
Since you seem to restructure its documentation, it seems to make little
sense, if I would come up with only one small section, or?
The most important question is: Should the complete section
"Separate, Explicit Instantiation" be removed or not?
If it is removed, this fix is done by this very sentence ;-). Currently I don't
see any strict portable method, which works via the non-inheritance
trick, but maybe another one sees such a solution...
Congratulations for all your personal engagement, boosters!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk