On Friday 29 August 2003 10:53 pm, Eric Friedman wrote:
P.S. Has there been any progress in handling BoostBook documentation in
CVS? Perhaps Greg or MetaComm can run nightly builds? (This of course does
not solve the problem of offline access though...)
There has been no progress, though it is
On Saturday 30 August 2003 08:00 am, David Abrahams wrote:
Misha Bergal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Eric Friedman wrote:
P.S. Has there been any progress in handling BoostBook documentation in
CVS? Perhaps Greg or MetaComm can run nightly builds?
We can do that. Is there any info on how
Douglas Gregor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~gregod/boost/tools/boostbook/doc/html/
You can build local copies of the documentation with BBv2 once you've read it
Thanks. It worked. We will be publishing HTML docs starting with this night's run.
--
Misha Bergal
On Tuesday 02 September 2003 04:58 pm, Misha Bergal wrote:
Douglas Gregor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~gregod/boost/tools/boostbook/doc/html/
You can build local copies of the documentation with BBv2 once you've
read it
Thanks. It worked. We will be publishing HTML
Eric Friedman wrote:
But suppose I have a variant v3, with content of a different type (call it
T3). Then the assignment v1 = v3 is far more complicated (we can't use
T1::operator=) and, without double storage, far more dangerous. The single
storage implementation behaves as follows:
Alexander Nasonov
Eric Friedman wrote:
But suppose I have a variant v3, with content of a different type (call
it
T3). Then the assignment v1 = v3 is far more complicated (we can't use
T1::operator=) and, without double storage, far more dangerous. The
single
storage implementation
Eric Friedman wrote:
If I understand you correctly, earlier versions of variant did precisely
what you describe. Unfortunately, the assumption you make is false in
general. See http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/boost/1311813.
Eric
Well, is_polymorphicT based on compiler
Alexander Nasonov wrote:
Eric Friedman wrote:
If I understand you correctly, earlier versions of variant did precisely
what you describe. Unfortunately, the assumption you make is false in
general. See
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/boost/1311813.
Eric
Well,
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave,
Please see the BoostBook reference documentation for variant. The HTML
is
quite out of sync with the current implementation. I haven't removed it
from
CVS yet though because
BTW, after looking at the implementation I was a bit disappointed to
see two copies of the storage. It seems to nullify one
important reason for using variants (space savings), and it generates
more code than a single-storage version. I know you had some rationale
for
that but I don't
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
BTW, after looking at the implementation I was a bit disappointed to
see two copies of the storage. It seems to nullify one
important reason for using variants (space savings), and it generates
more code than a single-storage version. I know you had some
Dave,
David Abrahams wrote:
[snip]
If you'd
like to see relatively recently-generated HTML, check out
http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~gregod/boost/doc/html/variant.html.
Suggestion: check an index page into the CVS which redirects to this
page.
The link I provided above will not be home to the
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave,
Please see the BoostBook reference documentation for variant. The HTML
is
quite out of sync with the current implementation. I haven't removed it
from
CVS yet though because
Dave,
Please see the BoostBook reference documentation for variant. The HTML is
quite out of sync with the current implementation. I haven't removed it from
CVS yet though because I am still in the process of porting the examples,
etc. to BoostBook.
Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks,
Eric
David Abrahams wrote:
[snip]
2.
All members of variant satisfy the strong guarantee of
exception-safety.
Seriously? What if an underlying type's assignment operator gives
only the basic guarantee? Surely, if you in fact use the
underlying type's assignment
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave,
Please see the BoostBook reference documentation for variant. The HTML is
quite out of sync with the current implementation. I haven't removed it from
CVS yet though because I am still in the process of porting the examples,
etc. to BoostBook.
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
[snip]
2.
All members of variant satisfy the strong guarantee of
exception-safety.
Seriously? What if an underlying type's assignment operator gives
only the basic guarantee? Surely, if you in fact use
David Abrahams wrote:
Eric Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dave,
Please see the BoostBook reference documentation for variant. The HTML
is
quite out of sync with the current implementation. I haven't removed it
from
CVS yet though because I am still in the process of porting the
18 matches
Mail list logo
