From: Steven Watanabe (steven_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-06 19:47:20
Jason Turner <lefticus <at> gmail.com> writes:
> I agree, in principal, and it was my original intention. However, a
> design goal was to make sure that any existing class could work with
> active_object and your above example does not allow for a specific
> constructor to be called. I guess, however, now that I think about it,
> if the user needs to call the not-default constructor he can store a
You can either have N template constructors or use
> I also considered something along the lines of:
> What is your thought on that?
Illegal in C++.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk