From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-04 18:42:39
"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> 3. In that reference section, '&' is used repeatedly where only '>>'
>> is appropriate. For example:
>> base *b;
>> ar & b;
>> That can only be confusing.
> Hmm - I checked that section and maybe it is confusing but not in the way
> it seems.
> the registration or export must be done on BOTH saving and loading of
> archives. It just occurred to me that this might not be obvious. My usage
> of & rather than << or >> reflects that examples such as the above use ...
> to replace code which creates and archive instance "ar" which could either
> be in input and /or output archive. I would be reluctant to replace the &
> above with << as it would suggest that << would be OK when it wouldn't be in
> all the cases where the example is applicable.
Um, I never suggested '<<'. Only '>>' is appropriate here.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk