Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Agreed. I didn't know about the other MACROs. I just found the one (or > two?) occasions where BOOST_DEDUCED_TYPENAME was used. Generally I think > it's better to have things as local as possible, but if the above > workaround is needed often, it might make sense to keep the macro and if > I understand you correctly, the new macro will replace all of the above > macros, right?
That would be the idea. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
