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

Subject: Re: [boost] [utility/value_init] boost::value_initialized<T> direct-initialized?
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-01 14:17:23

AMDG

Niels Dekker - address until 2010-10-10 wrote:
> Honestly the MSVC bug just made me more aware that copy-constructors 
> and non-copy-constructors can get confused, in a generic context. But 
> the example I added to the ticket (#3472) would also be ambiguous on 
> other compilers, when value_initialized(T const&) would be added:
>
>  class my_integer
>  {
>    value_initialized<int> m_data;
>  public:
>    operator value_initialized<int>() const;
>    operator int() const;
>  };
>
>  int main()
>  {
>    my_integer my;
>    value_initialized<int> val(my);
>  }
>
> See http://codepad.org/zukxSDbB

Um.  Why do you /want/ to do this?

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe