From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-13 13:53:16
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:u7js29ae4.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
| Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
| > But maybe someone else has a better (and robust enough) idea how to
| > detect which f(x) would be called...
| You can use something like what boost/detail/is_incrementable.hpp is
| doing, but I think that's basically the same technique you're using.
| And this seems to be exactly what I was talking about on the NG when I
| suggested removing ambiguity by detecting whether there's a function
| that could be found via ADL... or am I missing something?
are this all very complicated compared to what we want to achieve. wouldn't it be better just to stick to
the using detail::XX trick and then write on the portability page that for best portability, always include
new overloads before the range library.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk