"Gennaro Prota" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 03:06:35 -0800, "Andrei Alexandrescu" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >"Thomas Witt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >> IIUC is_based_and_derived<T,T> evaluates to true as well. Is a class T > >> strictly speaking a base class of itself? > > > >Yes > > That's a convention of is_base_and_derived though. To the standard a > class is not a base of itself, so this convention should be > documented. In other words, you have to specify whether the ordering > is strict or not.
True. I'd just note that in language theory, a type is always considered its own supertype because that makes it much easier to reason everywhere else. Andrei _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
