Subject: Re: [boost] [utility/value_init] boost::value_initialized<T> direct-initialized?
From: Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. (jhellrung_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-03 15:11:10
Niels Dekker - address until 2010-10-10 wrote:
> Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:
>> Although, echoing Steven: Maybe we should just settle for the
>> dead plain simple initialized(const T&) constructor.
> I'm not sure if Steven said so, but I certainly did :-D
Okay, maybe I got the email exchanges confused, my apologies ;)
> Please have a look at the patch I just attached to ticket #3472, having
> the simple initialized(const T&) constructor:
> Do you think it's okay?
Looks basically like how I had imagined.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk