On 07/26/12 11:21, Larry Evans wrote:
On 07/26/12 09:57, Steven Watanabe wrote:
AMDG
On 07/26/2012 07:40 AM, Larry Evans wrote:
On 07/26/12 09:02, Steven Watanabe wrote:
On 07/26/2012 05:29 AM, Larry Evans wrote:
The concept doesn't contain anything that matches an argument of type value<_a>.
Then why isn't a similar compile error produced when b_any is constructed?
This calls a different constructor which has different requirements. Have you read the reference for any? I tried to cover the constructors thoroughly.
My mistake. I didn't notice:
http://steven_watanabe.users.sourceforge.net/type_erasure/libs/type_erasure/...
had:
Concept must contain a matching instance of constructible.
The attached, when compiled with: #define CONSTRUCTIBLE_PH fails compilation despite satisfying this Concept constraint mentioned above. However, when: //#define CONSTRUCTIBLE_PH it compiles & runs OK. The compiling version just doesn't use a placeholder in the args to Sig of constructible. Why doesn't the one with the placeholder in the Sig args compile? Maybe I'm not understanding what's meant by: Concept must contain a matching instance of constructible. Could you please explain what I'm missing? -regards, Larry