Howard Hinnant wrote:
> On Dec 12, 2008, at 6:24 PM, Howard Hinnant wrote:
>
>
>> here's a long shot:
>>
>> ASTOwningResult& operator =(volatile ASTOwningResult&); // DO NOT
>> IMPLEMENT
>>
>> However I suspect if they don't respect bind an rvalue to A&, they
>> aren't going to respect not binding to a volatile either.
>>
>
> Oh, here's another solution:
>
> #if VC_2005 // or however we spell it
> public:
> #endif
> ASTOwningResult& operator =(ASTOwningResult& x)
> #if !VC_2005
> ; // DO NOT IMPLEMENT
> #else
> {
> return *this = moving::ASTResultMover<Destroyer>(x);
> }
> private:
> #endif
>
Yes, this is what my idea was. But I'll check the volatile idea first.
It's less intrusive.
Unless it's OK with Chris to switch to compiling with /Za.
Sebastian
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
