Re: [boost] [parameter] function types as named template parameters?

on Fri Jan 23 2009, Frank Mori Hess <frank.hess-AT-nist.gov> wrote:

...

Can you post a minimal example that reproduces this bug? I'm sure there's a quick fix.

Here you go. If you undefine NAMED_SIGNATURE_PARAMETER, the test works. Otherwise, it fails to compile (I'm using gcc 4.1.2).

<schnipp> This can't really be minimal, can it? Can you reduce it any further? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com