Re: [boost] boost and vendor's TR1 implementations

Subject: Re: [boost] boost and vendor's TR1 implementations
From: Sergey Sadovnikov (flex_ferrum_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-11 15:01:23

Hello, Michael.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008 at 10:43:38 PM you wrote:

MM> Sergey Sadovnikov wrote:

MM> Many of the boost libraries have evolved beyond their TR1 counter parts.
MM> Boost's shared_ptr is a good example of this. I primarily use VC9 SP1 
MM> which has a tr1 implementation but I use features of boost::shared_ptr
MM> that std::tr1::shared_ptr doesn't have.

Do you mean what there is no way to make boost and TR1 implementations
don't conflict each other? And, for example, boost::shared_ptr
couldn't be transparently replaced by corresponding TR1
class?

-- 
Best Regards,
 Sergey                          mailto:flex_ferrum_at_[hidden]