22 Mar
2008
22 Mar
'08
6:18 p.m.
Marco Costalba wrote:
It comes much more naturally to me to think at this:
if (ptr) ptr->doSomething();
Ok. This usage is fine with me. I guess I just hadn't seen the overload<> as being a declaration of an object with pointer behaviour. If that is what it is, then I would prefer the usage above. Thanks for the clarification, Kevin