On Monday 27 January 2003 08:26 pm, David B. Held wrote:
> My understanding is that the template constructor:
>
> template
> <
> typename T1,
> template <class> class OP1,
> class CP1,
> template <class> class KP1,
> template <class> class SP1
>
> SmartPtr(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1> const& rhs)
>
> is going to somehow get in the way by "eating" everything,
> and in particular not allow the constructor:
>
> SmartPtr(ByRef<SmartPtr> rhs)
>
> to kick in, as it should.
*sniff* *sniff* Smells like enable_if:
template
<
typename T1,
template <class> class OP1,
class CP1,
template <class> class KP1,
template <class> class SP1
>
SmartPtr(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1> const& rhs,
typename SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1>::copyable* = 0)
In SmartPtrs are should be copyable, include
typedef void copyable;
In other SmartPtrs, don't include typedef copyable.
Doug
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
