Re: [patch]: Removing duplicate functions, part 3 (and brief copyrightquestion)

[Chris Jefferson <caj at cs dot york dot ac dot uk>]

Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Chris Jefferson wrote:
>
> > I haven't bothered including test cases as there are already complete 
> > testcases for them.
>
>
> I doubt it: the __is_heap change is wrong, the arguments are swapped. 
> Please add
> testcases and be more careful.

OK, that was just stupid of me, ignore that patch. I'll be more serious 
and come back later in the week.

On a different note, are there offical guidelines on copying code? I've 
been writing a (very small, very limited) preprocessor library so I can 
macroise <tuple>, after a week of fun I had managed to create all the 
functionality I needed except for an O(1) equality testing macro. I knew 
that boost had one, so I decided to go and have a look to see how they 
did it. However now I've seen the "trick", I can't think of any other 
real way of implementing it than basically exactly the same code 
line-for-line...

Sorry if this question sounds a little silly / paranoid, but in this 
modern age of copyright issues, and the fact the FSF takes their 
copyright seriously, I wanted to check I wasn't doing anything wrong.

Chris