Boost logo

Boost :

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-21 07:37:32

David Abrahams wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>>> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>>> IIRC these support bind<R&>(&X::r, _1). Comment them out for cw8
>>>>> and see if anything breaks. :-)
>>>> Nothing breaks. I just assumed you didn't ahve any tests for that
>>>> case. And I had worked out this whole complicated patch. Waste of
>>>> time!
>>>> I assume you will apply the __MWERKS__ disablers?
>> Please apply them yourself, as you are the one with cwpro8 (and 9).
>> I'm reluctant to apply patches when I can't test them, no matter how
>> trivial. :-)
> I don't have 9 since my beta license expired and a new one hasn't
> arrived from MW yet. I could just turn those overloads off for all
> __MWERKS__ if a conforming compiler shouldn't need them. Is that
> what you had in mind?

No, no. The overloads are required to support

    bind<int&>( &X::i, _1 )(x) = 5;

but this is not a critical feature (which is why there are no tests for it),
so there isn't much harm if we disable it for CW8. But we shouldn't disable
it for CW9+ if there's no need. FWIW, my evaluation license for CW9.2
expired, too. ;-)

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