Re: [boost] Re: generalization of types in variant

From: E. Gladyshev (egladysh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-28 16:55:17

--- Eric Friedman <ebf_at_[hidden]> wrote:
[...]
> I do agree, however, that the need to explicitly handle boost::empty in 
> visitors does somewhat complicate the use of boost::empty as an 
> optimization. Perhaps the cannot_visit class I proposed elsewhere in 
> this thread is a good solution.
> 
> I'm open to suggestions.

Just wanted to add to my prev posting.
I think cannot_visit should be available in apply_visitor as well.

apply_visitor< cannont_visit<type1>, cannont_visit<type2> >(v);

It'll give a finer visitation control at the
invocation time in addition to the declaration time.

Eric, any chance to get in v1.31?

Eugene

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/