Boost logo

Boost :

From: Fernando Cacciola (fernando_cacciola_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-17 14:58:14

Howard Hinnant wrote:
> On Oct 14, 2005, at 11:54 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> [SNIP]
> then things just work, O(1). tuple should (will) have an analogous
> swap (as does tr1::array already - another "tuple like" type). This
> is already implemented in CodeWarrior Pro 10 (beta). The following:
> [SNIP]
> So I'm not weighing in on either side of the optional<T&> debate at
> the moment. All I'm saying is that any argument based on the current
> behavior of swapping tuple<T&> is going to be false tomorrow (if I can
> at all influence the committee - and I feel very strongly about this
> one).

Did I missunderstand the example, or your beta implementation of swap() for
tr1 tuples rebinds??


Fernando Cacciola

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at