Chuck Messenger wrote: >> * add_options() should use references rather than pointers
> "Pointer for return value" is C semantics. In C++, > pointers denote optional values. Non-const references are for return > values. I disagree *strongly*. In C and C++, the address-of syntax clearly indicates that this is a value that will be changed. Your suggestion of using a non-const reference would require me to check the header file to find the signature of _every_single_F#$^%ing_function to figure out which parameters are changed and which one's aren't. (particularly in the case of add_options() where it would take the causal reader about 10-20 minutes to find the correct function signature. >>> * Mandatory options >> >> Good idea. Output formatting is the only issue with me. um... do you think we could start calling this feature "mandatory parameters" since "mandatory options" is an oxymoron. -- Truth, James Curran www.noveltheory.com (personal) www.njtheater.com (professional) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost