Walter Bright Wrote: > Leandro Lucarella wrote: > > Exactly, it seems to me that the generalization in this case is > > counterproductive. > > It's similar to the motivation for the "= delete" capability proposed > for C++0x. Lawrence Crowl makes a good case for it: > > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2007/n2326.html#delete > > Lawrence mentions several uses for it.
So you're copying yet another C++0x feature and renaming it to attract more positive publicity..
