From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-22 05:21:49
>> integral_constant<bool,b> derives from mpl::bool_<b> for backwards
>> compatibility.
>
> For still more backward compatibility we ought to have a conversion
> in the other direction.
I realised that right after I posted (as usual, post first think later.
Doh!)
Are there any drawbacks to making the constructors of these types
non-trivial?
>> Stupid question but why doesn't your function do:
>>
>> template <class T>
>> typename is_fundamental<T>::type f(T)
>> {
>> return is_fundamental<T>::type();
>> }
>
> Stupid answer: broken compiler workaround.
>
> Anyway, this isn't a big deal. Maybe not even worth acting on.
OK, how about just using "is_fundamental<T>()" directly, no need to access
it's ::type member at all really ?
John.