5 Oct
2005
5 Oct
'05
1:53 p.m.
Geoffrey Romer <geoff.romer@gmail.com> writes:
OK, your correction works, but I don't understand why. I thought that omitting the typename ... ::type syntax just creates a null-ary metafunction. For example,
pair<char, plus<int_<1>, at<m_map,char> >
seems to me like it would produce not a pair consisting of a char and an int_, but a pair consisting of a char and a null-ary metafunction which, when applied, produces an int_. Am I missing something?
The 2nd argument to plus above probably isn't what you think. You're passing it a nullary metafunction: at<m_map,char>. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com