7 Oct
2007
7 Oct
'07
2 p.m.
"Marco Costalba" <mcostalba@gmail.com> writes:
boost::overload<Signatures> f;
// assign functions in any order f.add_overload(foo4);
Given that the entire point is to hold overloads, isn't "add_overload" a bit redundant? Why not just "add"? -Miles -- .Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're guessing.