David Abrahams wrote: > IMO the rules that allow you to do things like leave out a nullary > template's argument list when the template body doesn't look like an > argument list
This can be removed. I agree. > and combining simple argument separators with ".." > separators are confusing at best and don't provide real utility. I > think we should avoid such syntax quirks. Those are there to provide backward compatibility. One of the goals is to replace/rewrite most of the rules using templates. Alas, QB's syntax is admittedly quirky to begin with. In an ideal world, I'd redesign the syntax set and rewrite Qb, but, I guess I don't quite have time to invest on such a rewrite. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
