Re: [boost] Re: Variant implementation change (was re: unions)

From: E. Gladyshev (egladysh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-09 11:51:25

--- David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 
> It isn't a question of "singular variants vs. basic guarantees".
> Nobody's going to give up the basic guarantee.  Either we're going to
> change the invariant of the class to accomodate singularity, thus
> preserving the basic guarantee, or we're not going to have
> singularity.
> 

If you allow singular variants, you don't need to provide 
basic guarantess (the way they are spelled out now in variant)
in variant anymore.

Eugene

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com