From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-11 06:33:56
In-Reply-To: <97E47D90-1A3F-11D9-BF1C-003065D18932_at_[hidden]>
hinnant_at_[hidden] (Howard Hinnant) wrote (abridged):
> > The second is a container of values which may be polymorphic. It
> > would be a more-or-less drop-in replacement for vector<T>. It
> > would not allow nulls, and the syntax would be like
> > v.begin()->method(). Although it would probably use pointers
> > behind the scenes, that would be an implementation
> > detail not revealed by its interface.
>
> I.e. a vector<T&> ?
That might be a reasonable syntax, yes.
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK