Daniel Walker wrote:
This is not an intended (or supported) use case at all. Nevertheless, it seemed reasonable to roll out decltype slowly.
OK, sounds good.
And how about adding a "Note" that warns this kind of codes will break in the future to the documentation?
Sure. I added the following:
"In a future release, BOOST_RESULT_OF_USE_DECLTYPE may be enabled by default on compilers that support decltype, so if you use the above protocol please take care to ensure that the result_type and result<> members are accurate. If you wish to continue to use the protocol on compilers that support decltype, use boost::tr1_result_of, which is also defined in
."
That's great, Daniel! Thank you for your quick work. Just a minor suggenstion: "the result_type and result<> members are accurate." --> "the result_type and result<> members accurately represent the result type." IMHO, the latter is more clear. Regards, Michel