| -----Original Message----- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Larry Evans
[snip]
I can see much logic in your layout (much more perhaps than in the C language!) but sadly, I think the balance of pros and cons is in favour of sticking to a consistent style for a library like Boost code guidelines.
I'm trying to get synopsis to translate into Boost guideline form; however, I'm having trouble with getting comments properly attached
to the declarations. As soon as that is done, I'll upload it.
Meanwhile, I've emailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] a copy of
the latest version where:
The main change is that the ostreambuf_decorator_end,
which replaces the ostreambuf_decorator_con, only serves to
terminate the pipeline. I thought this was better than having the
terminator do two things at once. Also, the code is simpler.
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
