>From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > "John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> Maybe you had the following variation on Terje's code in mind. > >> > >> The following worked with GCC3.1/2, VC6/7/7.1 and Comeau 4.3.0.1: > > > > Hey, now that one really does work well, I'm still testing here (doesn't > > work with Borland, but I have a fallback position for that), but if there > > are no objections then you should expect to see the boost code updated soon. > > One question though - a lot of people seem to have worked on this: which > > people deserve the copyright/credit listing? > > Soooo... Somewhere back in this thread Peter Dimov raised a serious > question about whether this implements the semantics we want. Was > there ever agreement on that?
As I mentioned in an earlier posting, Rani's proposal does what the current docs on is_base_and_derived says. It doesn't mandate public, unambiguous base class. If one wants that semantic, then perhaps another trait could be useful for it. Regards, Terje _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
