Re: [boost] [announce] Overload V2

From: Kevin Scarr (kscarr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-22 14:18:05

Marco Costalba wrote:

> It comes much more naturally to me to think at this:
> 
> if (ptr)
>    ptr->doSomething();

Ok. This usage is fine with me. I guess I just hadn't seen the 
overload<> as being a declaration of an object with pointer behaviour.

If that is what it is, then I would prefer the usage above.

Thanks for the clarification,
Kevin