Gavin Lambert
This may be a bikeshed, but why not use auto()?
This would retain "auto" as "infer the appropriate type here" and "()" as "invoke with no parameters", together implying a constructor call. And it avoids overloading yet another keyword.
That's a good idea and probably way more straightforward, thanks! Vicente J. Botet Escriba
Note that {} means already IMPLICIT default constructor.
Of course I know of this type of initialization. There is still a problem in readability: Are you passing some kind of empty list '{}', or do you want to construct an object using the default ctor, which most often leads to an initialized, that is non-empty object. => Counterintuitivity Furthermore, there is no way to initialize an object this way, if one ctor takes an std::initializer_list. Gavin Lambert
Although ultimately if you're mostly concerned about typing long names, then typedef is your friend.
Truly. As it's a good idea to use 'auto()' instead, because it's the forehead of template-less type-deduction, why not complete the set of 'auto'-deducing features? _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost