Re: [boost] singleton design plan

Rob Stewart wrote:

According to the grammar, Comeau is wrong:

[...]

I think comeau just complained about not having a default constructor explicitly defined, and in order to define a constructor I had to give the class a name. I'm not sure why it wanted the default constructor to be explicitly defined, though.

That may cause grief to those using the -Wshadow option of recent vintage GCC's.

Perhaps I can just provide the name for comeau compilations then. -Jason