From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-19 15:23:09
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 14:22:53 -0400 (EDT), Rob Stewart wrote
> That does make sense, but so does the "date wrapper" idea. The
> latter provides a convenient means to use operator overloading
> meaningfully while making the behavior of those operators
> specific to the wrapper type. I think the date wrapper approach
> will prove easier to use, but more cumbersome to implement.
I have no idea what the 'date wrapper approach' is...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk