Subject: Re: [boost] tie alternative?
From: Robert Jones (robertgbjones_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-30 09:44:15
2008/10/27 David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> ... The attached proof-of-concept uses
> operator%, but I don't feel particularly good about that choice either.
Clearly that proof of concept works, but I would have instinctively assumed
the arguments to operator%() must be const. Even tho' that's obviously
not the case, there's still the question of whether they SHOULD be const.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk