From: Thorsten Ottosen (nesotto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-13 13:53:16
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:u7js29ae4.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
| Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
| > But maybe someone else has a better (and robust enough) idea how to
| > detect which f(x) would be called...
|
| You can use something like what boost/detail/is_incrementable.hpp is
| doing, but I think that's basically the same technique you're using.
| And this seems to be exactly what I was talking about on the NG when I
| suggested removing ambiguity by detecting whether there's a function
| that could be found via ADL... or am I missing something?
are this all very complicated compared to what we want to achieve. wouldn't it be better just to stick to
the using detail::XX trick and then write on the portability page that for best portability, always include
new overloads before the range library.
br
Thorsten