Re: [boost] Boost 1_58_0_b1_rc2 is available for testing

AMDG On 03/17/2015 04:38 PM, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:

[Steven Watanabe]

...

One of these has to fail: int ref(int&); int rref(int&&); boost::function f1(&ref); boost::function f2(&rref); I don't think there's any strong reason to support one over the other

The Standard says that f1 is ill-formed for std::function (and this is properly rejected by my overhauled <functional> in VC 2015; I'd assume that libstdc++ and libc++ also reject).

So is it more important to match std::function or to avoid breaking existing code? In Christ, Steven Watanabe