Boost logo

Boost :

From: cppljevans_at_[hidden]
Date: 2003-10-29 08:07:28

On 10/29/2003 04:31 AM, David B. Held wrote:
> <cppljevans_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:bnncgc$sgc$
>>On 10/28/2003 05:31 PM, cppljevans_at_[hidden] wrote:
>> class P1, class P2, class P3, class P4
> Really? I haven't tried the legacy interface in probably over a
> year.
I was only interested in it because it was easier for me to
understand template template parameters rather than the
class P1...P4 parameters with the mpl magic that's
used with them. However, if nobody plans on using them
I'd rather not spend time on it.
> Right now, if you use the policy adaptor interface, you have
> specify the MPL lambda argument for policies. So you
> would do this:
> smart_ptr<my_type, array_storage<_> > p;
I'll try that.
> However, I will be adding metafunction classes which will
> eliminate this step, allowing the same end-user syntax as
> the template template interface:
> smart_ptr<my_type, array_storage> p;
So somehow this allows specifying parameters in any order, i.e.
I could specify the storage policy first and ownership last?

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at