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

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).
>
Interesting!

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

TIA

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