On 05/20/2010 01:10 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote: > ... for reference, it would be something like this (in my recollections, > it was even uglier ;) > > template<typename _Tp> > _Tp* > addressof(_Tp& __v) > { > return reinterpret_cast<_Tp*> > (&const_cast<char&>(reinterpret_cast<const volatile char&>(__v))); > } > By the way, Peter (I think you are the author of the current boost implementation, which I looked at yesterday), in case we end up having something like the above, temporarily at least, which kind of acknowledgment would you be Ok with? Is it enough your name in the ChangeLog?
Thanks, Paolo.