5 Jun
2005
5 Jun
'05
5:10 p.m.
In-Reply-To: <20050601173608.GA77601@compsoc.man.ac.uk> cow@compsoc.man.ac.uk (Jonathan Wakely) wrote (abridged):
Actually, it's moot because it's been semi-standardised in TR1, not because you now understand the design goals ;)
Really? My impression was that TR1 had not been reviewed in detail. When the hashing library was submitted to boost, I understood it to be the same as TR1 yet we found several problems with it. We did not blindly accept it just because it was in TR1. -- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.