Re: [Boost-users] updating mpl::map to 1.34

From: Ovanes Markarian (om_boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-14 13:12:40

But my question would be: Would you see an advantage in this approach (with type derivation)? On
the other hand, if I could manipulate the types the same way in mpl::vector and mpl::map this
would be more clearer. I think vector should not support the derived types as well.

With Kind Regards,

Ovanes Markarian

On Thu, December 14, 2006 19:04, David Abrahams wrote:
> "Ovanes Markarian" <om_boost_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> I believe I found some problem, when I was writing the test cases ;) It is for sure responsible
>> for the reported misbehavior with max_element.
>>
>>
>> Well, I don't know how to deal with this issue, may be you can
>> advice smth. Map accepts sequence of type pair. Vector as well. My
>> approach was to think, as long as mpl::pair static interface (first,
>> second) is valid I can use another class as well.
>
> Clearly from your experiments you can see that you can't actually do
> that.
>
> --
> Dave Abrahams
> Boost Consulting
> www.boost-consulting.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>