"Terje Slettebų" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 038e01c2bf0e$cc8f35a0$cb6c6f50@pc">news:038e01c2bf0e$cc8f35a0$cb6c6f50@pc... >I'm also all for simplicity, cohesion, decoupling, do the simplest thing that could possibly work (XP/pragmatic programmers), etc., and I'm sure Andrei is, as well. After all, when Loki's typelists have been discussed, he's stated that they are heavily KISSed. Others have argued that the flexibility of MPL makes it worth it. So it's a little ironic situation. :)<
I did a good job (until now) abstaining myself from doing the **exact** same remark... I'm not sure how an argument and its exact opposite could lead to a congruent viewpoint. Back to pbd smart pointers, looks like nobody needs policy-based smart pointers coz they're so complex and shared_ptr just works for everybody, yet new xyz_ptr classes designed from scratch seem to appear around here quite often :o\. I just can't stop remarking how easy they can all be implemented as policies of Loki::SmartPtr. Andrei the lurker _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
