[Note to moderators: This is just to reply, including giving possible alternative places to discuss this]
>From: "Jason House" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The first part of this is probably a stupid question Not at all. :) > Terje Slettebų wrote: > > > > What makes the template typedef proposal different from the template alias > > proposal, is that the former may be specialised, and the latter may be > > deduced. > > What do you mean by deduced? The paper says: "2. A typedef template is itself an alias; it cannot be specialized. This choice would allow: . deduction on typedef template function parameters (see 2.4)" The paper doesn't propose that model. However, that has been suggested as an alternative, mentioned in this thread, in the form of "template alias" (i.e. not using "typedef" at all). > I saw it in the proposal too... > > Here's a copy of text from the proposal: > > *** > template<class T, class P> class smart_ptr; > template<class T> typedef smart_ptr<T, SharedPolicy> shared_ptr; > template<class T> void f(smart_ptr<T, SharedPolicy>); > template<class T> void f(shared_ptr<T>); > > In this proposal, the last two lines declare different templates. > *** > > That is the kind of stuff that concerns me. There is a deviation in the > usage of smart_ptr<T, SharedPolicy> and shared_ptr<T> even though they > are typedef'd to be the same. I think what is meant is that the templates are not aliases (i.e. the "template<class T> void(...)" templates). Otherwise, the last two lines would declare identical templates. However, as I understand it, the template function parameters express the same type, i.e. typeof(smart_ptr<T, SharedPtr>) == typeof(shared_ptr<T>), for a given T. > Also, where should such discussion be going? Someone mentioned that > this is not the place, but I'm not familiar with the various other > mailing lists. Hm, there's the C++ standards committee mailing lists ("reflectors") which have been mentioned, but as I understand, these are not open to the public. Another alternative is the newsgroups, such as comp.std.c++, which is discussion about the standard, itself, which this is about. They may also be accessed from the web (http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=comp.std.c%2B%2B). Regards, Terje _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost