Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Thread] unique_future without && ?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Boost.Thread] unique_future without && ?
From: John M. Dlugosz (mpbecey7gu_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-09 12:04:38

On 4/8/2012 10:25 AM, Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr. wrote:

> Well the accessibility of a member function never influences its position in an overload
> set (AFAIK). What is *suppose* to happen in C++03 for the above example is that the
> future::future(rv< future >&) overload gets called, since a future rvalue isn't suppose to
> be bindable to the argument of the (private and undefined) future::future(future&)
> overload. That's clearly not happening :( I can't think of a fix other than making your
> intentions very explicit as you've done above :/

So, does anyone have any insight on the VS10 error?  If it's a straightforward compiler 
bug (not allowing T&& and const T& to be overloaded sets) I think that would have been 
discovered and get in the way _everywhere_.

—John