Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] On the Road to Aspen (BoostCon 2010)
From: Jonathan Franklin (franklin.jonathan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-30 21:08:58

Next message: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] boost::variant and "Current Approach: Temporary Heap Backup" vs "An Initial Solution: Double Storage""
Previous message: Peter Foelsche: "Re: [boost] boost::variant and "Current Approach: Temporary HeapBackup" vs "An Initial Solution: Double Storage""
In reply to: OvermindDL1: "Re: [boost] On the Road to Aspen (BoostCon 2010)"
Next in thread: Stewart, Robert: "Re: [boost] On the Road to Aspen (BoostCon 2010)"

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 3:01 PM, OvermindDL1 <overminddl1_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Mine company blocks both for regulatory reasons.
>
> "regulatory reasons"? Regulating what? Just sounds rather plain idiotic...
> Still curious as to what their reasoning could possible be.

Regulating your time-wasting activities whilst on the clock.
;-)

Jon

Next message: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] boost::variant and "Current Approach: Temporary Heap Backup" vs "An Initial Solution: Double Storage""
Previous message: Peter Foelsche: "Re: [boost] boost::variant and "Current Approach: Temporary HeapBackup" vs "An Initial Solution: Double Storage""
In reply to: OvermindDL1: "Re: [boost] On the Road to Aspen (BoostCon 2010)"
Next in thread: Stewart, Robert: "Re: [boost] On the Road to Aspen (BoostCon 2010)"

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