From: Dave Gomboc (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-27 22:33:21
> > So then reverse resource_manager and get managed_resource<>, or just
> > managed<>.
>
> Why not just resource<>? Management is implied anyway; that's the
> reason for the existence of the class.
*laugh* I was thinking exactly the opposite. To me, the resource itself
is clear from the template parameter -- it's the management that needs to
be indicated.
+1 for managed<>.
Dave