> Hi Robert! > > I'm looking at the docs right now and so far it looks _far_ better than anything I'v > seen > before. > Congratulations! > > A small nit-pick: > > The pointer example uses a for-loop construct of the form: > > for(i = 0; i++ < 10;) > > unless there's some clause elsewhere, according to 5.4, the result of the expression > (i++ < 10) > is unspecified (there's no sequence point between the operators) > Sorry... I thought these operators had the same precedence, but ++ has higher precedence so it comes first.
There's still something wrong with the example though: the first stops[i] index from 1 (because 'i' is 1 already when the body is entered) Fernando Cacciola _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
