[boost] Re: compile time member detection

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-15 22:11:07

Mat Marcus <mat-boost_at_[hidden]> writes:

> --On Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:33 PM -1000 David Abrahams
>   <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Mat Marcus <mat-boost_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>> The current proposals address this, but as I mentioned earlier
>>> there was some pushback from the compiler vendors leading to at
>>> least one workaround proposal that in my mind resembles named
>>> conformance.
>>
>> Really??!  I thought the big problem they had was with structural
>> conformance (?)
>>
>
> Um yes. That's what I was trying to say. I'll try again. They had a
> problem with structural conformance and Dietmar's workaround reminds
> me of named conformance. Does that agree with your recollection?

I don't know what "Dietmar's workaround" is, sorry.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com