On 3/4/06, JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z <joaquin@tid.es> wrote:
Hello Felipe,
[snip]
Of course, count on this being committed asap. I've got a couple of questions, though:
Thanks,
1. Regardless of whether your compiler takes the expanded macro as containing a '>>' instead of two '>'s, it is my understanding that a *conformant* preprocessor shouldn't do this. Is this correct? (I'll add the blank, anyway.)
To be honest, I'm not a preprocessor expert, so I really dont know...
2. Do you say this particular use of const_mem_fun (macro problems aside) works for you? Which compiler and version of Boost (1.33.1,CVS) are you using? I'm a little surprised because accessing tuple::get with const_mem_fun is a very tricky issue, as discussed for instance in the following thread:
It worked allright here. I'm using the cvs version. My compiler is VC7.1
http://lists.boost.org/boost-users/2005/12/16087.php
Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
best regards, -- Felipe Magno de Almeida