On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 21:10 -0400, Beman Dawes wrote:
"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> wrote in message news:d4gi2c$2jd$1@sea.gmane.org...
In Lillehammer we rejected a policy-based smart pointer...
That isn't what happened. The committee's wiki describes the LWG's position:
"No support for a policy-based framework at this time. This is a refinement of Loki, but, while Loki is in use, this refinement isn't. We'll consider such a proposal later, if there is widespread practice and strong arguments for it."
Is the requirement for a library to be in "widespread" use general for all libraries or specific to policy_ptr because the TR1 already has smart_ptr? /ikh _______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System. _______________________________________________________________________