Subject: Re: [boost] is_virtual_base_of ?
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-11 12:22:12
> I'm still having some problems with this. Some compilers are flaging as
> an error
> the case where B doesn't have a default constructor.
Rightly too I suspect :-(
What happens if you give class X an explicit default constructor that is
declared but not implemented? Maybe copy constructor, and assignment ops
too in case the compiler tries to automatically create those?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk