Re: [Boost-users] updating mpl::map to 1.34

But my question would be: Would you see an advantage in this approach (with type derivation)? On the other hand, if I could manipulate the types the same way in mpl::vector and mpl::map this would be more clearer. I think vector should not support the derived types as well. With Kind Regards, Ovanes Markarian On Thu, December 14, 2006 19:04, David Abrahams wrote:

"Ovanes Markarian" writes:

...

I believe I found some problem, when I was writing the test cases ;) It is for sure responsible for the reported misbehavior with max_element.

Well, I don't know how to deal with this issue, may be you can advice smth. Map accepts sequence of type pair. Vector as well. My approach was to think, as long as mpl::pair static interface (first, second) is valid I can use another class as well.

Clearly from your experiments you can see that you can't actually do that.

-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com

_______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users