From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-07 02:03:39
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Andy Little" <andy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> "Doug Gregor" <dgregor_at_[hidden]> wrote
>>> On Oct 6, 2006, at 10:01 AM, Andy Little wrote:
>>>> "Stefan Seefeld" <seefeld_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>> (and in fact I'm totally delighted to find the documentation use
>>>>> to present them !),
>>>> I wasnt going to bring it up, but I was specifically told not to
>>>> use Concept
>> para 5
> ? I don't see anything there that amounts to "specifically telling you
> not to use Concept docs."
Concepts arent an established convention. Read Doug Gregors post. They havent
been finalised. I knew exactly what you meant in that and other discussions.
Also I can say with a large amount of certainty that if I had presented PQS for
another review, and had used Concept documentation, then it would be pointed out
by you or others that I had been specifically told not to do so.
Now I shall sit back and watch the goalposts move as if by magic ...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk