"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
Aside from my objection, maybe you should accept my other patch in that case, since it ought to function equivalently to the overloads accepted by a conforming compiler.
Too much of a change just to support one particular "bonus" feature on one particular broken compiler where nobody will likely attempt to use the feature. :-) Let's just #ifdef it out for cw8 and be done with it. At least for now. 'Cause I don't have the time to elevate bind< R& > to "supported" ATM.
I wouldn't want to vouch for it without some tests, though. Could you please write me some?
Sometime next week, maybe. But feel free to apply your patch anyway, as it only affects CW8
Aside from other issues, it sounds like you're telling me to do two different things here (just ifdef it out vs. apply your patch anyway). Please clarify. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com