On Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:24:41 -0500, Douglas Gregor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Most likely, those present either didn't think it was a problem or didn't feel >strongly enough about the situation to speak up. There really aren't all that >many good uses for overloading operator&, and it can be a bit dangerous, so I >would expect some resistence in getting it removed from the CopyConstructible >requirements. Come to think of it, if not for Lambda's overloading of >operator&, I wouldn't really care about the issue :) Hmmm... if you proposed a resolution, could you please publish/post the text of your report? Genny. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
