Re: [boost] [utility/value_init] boost::value_initialized<T> direct-initialized?

Subject: Re: [boost] [utility/value_init] boost::value_initialized<T> direct-initialized?
From: Jeffrey Hellrung (jhellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-31 04:54:47

Jeffrey Hellrung wrote:
> Also, your initialized<T> does not have a default constructor.  This 
> makes sense, but I'm just double-checking that this is a conscious 
> decision and not an oversight.

Actually, on second thought, this doesn't make sense, but I might be 
missing something...why would one use an initialized<T> with no default 
constructor, rather than just T itself?

- Jeff