From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-13 13:33:32
David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> Also note that the user doesn't have to "find" the type in the
>> message -- it's right there, saying something like
>> TypeNotRegistered=blah<...; and it's always about user's own type
>> if lambda types are indeed registered (if we are talking about
>> lambda). And it seems to me that it's much easier to register
>> lambda types than implement what you propose.
> Maybe so. I'm beginning to think that I may have overestimated the
> amount of registration that would be required here.
So, do we *have* typeof registrations for the lambda and bind
-- 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