AMDG Daniel Frey wrote:
Sean reported the same underlying problem against the operators library as <https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/979>. I applied the fix as it was transparent for the users and also suggested a similar change for noncopyable on the mailing list - but there wasn't much interest IIRC.
The problem with the approach you described is IMHO that if you allow noncopyable_<T> as an *alternative*, most people will likely ignore it. OTOH, a breaking change - turning the classic noncopyable into a template - might be too intrusive. Personally, I would not mind it, since the compiler will catch all uses of noncopyable without a template parameter and the required change is a no-brainer, so +1 for the change from my side. Let's see if more people like the idea this time :)
I don't think this is sufficiently important to warrant a breaking change no matter how obvious the update is. In Christ, Steven Watanabe