28 Jul
2011
28 Jul
'11
9:53 a.m.
On 7/26/2011 11:35 AM, Nevin Liber wrote:
Doesn't the problem go away if you don't use boost::noncopyable at all? If one agrees that the C++0x mechanism is superior, is there still a use case under C++0x for boost::noncopyable?
Because some compilers support move references but don't support the =delete syntax. In my mind "no copy" does not say anything about the ability to move. In fact, move will typically be just dandy if the compiler handles it. So I would like that meaning. —John