On Jul 6, 2004, at 11:02 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
Howard Hinnant <hinnant@twcny.rr.com> writes:
As I recall, call_traits was intended to work around the "reference to reference" problem for both parameters and return types. This problem has since been solved by cwg #106 ( http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#106 ). Or by boost::add_reference ;-)
Out of interest, when did call_traits came into existence? Was it prior to type_traits? When was it reviewed? It seems that we are re-reviewing call_traits again?
Sorry, it's my fault. I sometimes look at Boost and see these little libraries and wonder if they really belong at the same level as the Python lib, or Spirit, or the Graph lib, etc. Call traits seems like a trivial application of type traits, but hasn't been maintained with the same vigor. Being accepted doesn't mean that a library stays in Boost forever... for instance, my previous rampage resulted in having Compose removed from Boost, because we have better libraries (Bind, Lambda, Phoenix) now. Doug