Re: [boost] Re: Perfect Forwarding (almost)

David Abrahams wrote:

And how can I understand what you're saying well enough to convince implementors that I'm right?

I think that the first thing to do is to ask implementors why they require the accessible copy constructor for f( X(1) ), while at the same time the seemingly equivalent f( XC(X(1)) ) (as per the infamous second bullet) compiles fine.