From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-24 08:25:40
David Abrahams wrote:
> If your proposal handles some cases just as well as Matthias'
> proposal, it's no coincidence: those proposals have crucial elements
> in common. However, the elements those two proposals have in common
> are the same ones that raised the strongest objections from Robert, so
> we're trying to examine a less intrusive design for now.
Perhaps Robert can state for himself whether he considers
unacceptable, and why. It is a very localized change. (Contiguous sequences
with non-pointer iterators such as std::vector and std::string would also
need to be touched slightly by manually inlining save_collection in their
respective save overloads, but this is also minor; or alternatively, we can
define boost::pbegin and use that in save_collection.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk