stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: Another potential hole in the tuple specs
Date Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:51:49 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
> A const assignment operator?  Sounds unorthodox but I'll try it out.
> My current workaround is to declare std::ignore mutable (i.e.
> non-const).  A const assignment operator (if it works) would be
> preferable; no visible workaround required.

Remember that even the absence (or presence) of the const
qualifier on things like std::ignore can be detected by
conformance test suites so dropping it is not a viable


View raw message