Re: [boost] Report from Mont Tremblant C++ Committee meeting

From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-11 12:55:02

Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> Joel de Guzman writes:
>> Ah, yes, and I will forever be against the pointer interface.
>>
>> Zen of Python:
>> ...
>> There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
>> ...
>
> I can quote the whole thing any time of the day, but it hardly
> justifies the existence of 'get', let alone its "obviousness" ;).
>
Ya, hmm, well, get() (and get_pointer()) there in the proposal is a mistake 
(or else the pointer interface is.. clearly both shouldn't coexist)

FWIW, I wrote the 2 proposals in a high rush over one weekend 'cause I had 
no idea there was a dateline until Thorstten told me about it, just a few 
days earlier..
There were a couple of loose ends in both of them... as you can see.

Best

-- 
Fernando Cacciola
SciSoft
http://fcacciola.50webs.com/