Hi Windows dev's,

Could we have some feedback on my suggestion for simply using the
default std::pair<> constructor?

Robert.

On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Robert Osfield
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I've just reviewed both of your proposed fixes and both seem rather
> long winded.  I'd be inclined towards Mark's solution as it doesn't
> rely on any optional compile paths.  I do wonder if one might just be
> able to use a default constructed CapEntry as it's just typedef
> std::pair<..> and would std::pair's default constructor not just
> initialize to 0 for us?
>
> Robert.
>
_______________________________________________
osg-submissions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org

Reply via email to