From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-01 12:25:34
"Joao Abecasis" <jpabecasis_at_[hidden]> escribió en el mensaje
> Fernando Cacciola wrote:
>> If I change the code now to use T's operator=(), assignment of
>> optional<T&> will have a _radically_ different semantics. A correct one,
>> that's for sure, but end user code might be fundamentally impacted.
> Maybe boost::reference_wrapper can be used internally to wrap reference
> types and solve this issue.
We're not talking about an implementation problem here; this is about the
"correct" behaviour and whether is ok to change to it given the potential
impact on user programs.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk