David Abrahams wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov@mmltd.net> writes:
IIRC these support bind<R&>(&X::r, _1). Comment them out for cw8 and see if anything breaks. :-)
Nothing breaks. I just assumed you didn't ahve any tests for that case. And I had worked out this whole complicated patch. Waste of time!
I assume you will apply the __MWERKS__ disablers?
Please apply them yourself, as you are the one with cwpro8 (and 9). I'm reluctant to apply patches when I can't test them, no matter how trivial. :-)
I don't have 9 since my beta license expired and a new one hasn't arrived from MW yet. I could just turn those overloads off for all __MWERKS__ if a conforming compiler shouldn't need them. Is that what you had in mind?
No, no. The overloads are required to support bind<int&>( &X::i, _1 )(x) = 5; but this is not a critical feature (which is why there are no tests for it), so there isn't much harm if we disable it for CW8. But we shouldn't disable it for CW9+ if there's no need. FWIW, my evaluation license for CW9.2 expired, too. ;-)