From: Andrei Alexandrescu \(See Website for Email\) (andrewalex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-07 11:08:51
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Well, it might.
> But then, the user knows he's using the initialization library, and
> operator, has a different meaning in that context, just like
> operator<< means something else in the context of a Spirit gramar.
I see. So I'd like to make a quick poll for Boosters: Overloading the comma
operator in a way that could change order of evaluation of its arguments is:
a) an obsolete coding standard
b) a valid coding standard
c) a valid coding standard, but for reasons x, y, and z, the initialization
library doesn't violate it/violates it but gets away with it/etc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk