Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-27 10:59:24

Next message: Douglas Gregor: "Re: [boost] Boost topological_sort attempts to advance a dereferencable iterator 20 steps outside the valid range"
Previous message: james.jones_at_[hidden]: "Re: [boost] Some follow-up on my fixed point code, and safe integers"
In reply to: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"
Next in thread: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"
Reply: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"

Daniel Walker wrote:
> On 4/26/07, Peter Dimov <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>> I'm fairly certain that we ought to leave Borland users alone,
>> though.
>
> Like I said, I don't think this change will impact borland users,
> other than making placeholders more interoperable. I'll try to test it
> later though.

Interoperability is not an issue for Borland as far as I can see; Lambda
doesn't work there at all.

Next message: Douglas Gregor: "Re: [boost] Boost topological_sort attempts to advance a dereferencable iterator 20 steps outside the valid range"
Previous message: james.jones_at_[hidden]: "Re: [boost] Some follow-up on my fixed point code, and safe integers"
In reply to: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"
Next in thread: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"
Reply: Daniel Walker: "Re: [boost] [bind][tr1] patch for more compliant placeholders"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk