7 Apr
2009
7 Apr
'09
1:46 p.m.
AMDG Jonathan Leonard wrote:
Why not? Have you actually looked at what compiler optimizations do? The optimization required is really not very sophisticated.
Mmm. I know that compilers do much more sophisticated optimization than this but I just figured that there was a more elegant way to express my actual intent here. Using a 'void*' when it isn't ever actually used/read seems like a 'hack' [and I don't like writing superfluous code].
However, it seems that there's no better approach in this case, so it will be fine.
The alternative is to create a dummy class whose constructor ignores its arguments. In Christ, Steven Watanabe