Re: [boost] boost::any: explicit constructor?

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-26 09:46:59

Kevlin Henney wrote:
>
> I outlined in a previous email the intended syntax for use. To break
> this would be more than a little inconvenient, and certainly against
> the spirit of its design. Making the constructor 'explicit' would
> break the compilation of other code that is quite reasonable --
> perhaps not yours, because you are following the style I outlined as
> an alternative in a previous response -- but it would still break it
> and for no good reason, eg
>
>         std::map<std::string, boost::any> table;
>         ...
>         table[key] = 0; // reasonable usage

This use case does not need an implicit constructor, just a templated
operator=.