Re: [Boost-users] Re: date-time

From: Duane Murphy (duanemurphy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-21 10:09:21

--- At Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:47:51 -0400, David Abrahams wrote:

>Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:20:45 -0400, David Abrahams
>> <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> 
>>> > I've given in to user demand -- the default constructor to
>>> > not_a_date_time will be in the 1.32 -- gregorian::date same story.
>>> 
>>> Why was that the right choice?  It seems like an opportunity for bugs.
>>
>>     What would you propose as an alternative?  
>
>Not having a default constructor for for dates at all.

I've never used dates (and I don't play one on TV) but is there a reason
to put dates into a container? Doesn't this (usually) require having a
default constructor? 

 ...Duane