"Jeff Flinn" <TriumphSprint2000@[...].com>  wrote in message
news:c97afd$60h$1@[...]..
> 
>  "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@[...].se> wrote in message
>  news:c96p5d$qlg$1@[...]..
>  >

[...]

>  matter
>  > if this is a two-step procedure:
>  > Allocate in constructors + Initialize in entry
>  > or one-step:
>  > Allocate and initialize in constructor.
> 
>  class astate : non_copyable
>  {
>      T& mRef;
> 
>      astate();
> 
>  public:
> 
>      astate( T& aRef ):mRef(aRef){ aRef.somefunction(); }
> 
>      void init( T& aRef ){ mRef = aRef; mRef.somefunction(); } // not the
>  same
> 
>  };

No, of course not. I meant:

// one-step
class astate : non_copyable { ...
    astate( T& aRef ):mRef(aRef){ aRef.somefunction(); }
... };

versus:

// two-step
class astate : non_copyable { ...
    astate( T& aRef ):mRef(aRef){}
    void entry(){ mRef.somefunction(); }
... };

Regards,

// Johan



_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost