Fernando Cacciola wrote:
Got it, thanks :-)----- Original Message ----- From: "Vincent Finn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>And now the question can this be used with VC6 ?Yes :-)) I've uploaded the new version which compiles and runs properly with VC6.0
But back to the other point
I think it would be nice the have an optional that could be used for nice function arguments
(the posts between you and Gennadiy give reaons I hadn't though of)
I agree that it can be done using pointers and wrappers but so can the return value, optional is a wrapper for this type of behaviour so having a second wrapper for an almost identical purpose seems bad :-(
Would some sort of specialisation be possible ?
or a small wrapper class to allow the other syntax while leaving the current (safer) version as default?
Vin
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
