AMDG On 1/14/2011 5:49 PM, Bryce Lelbach wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 17:12:32 -0800 Steven Watanabe<watanabesj@gmail.com> wrote:
Unfortunately, conforming to the standard isn't good enough. I think you just broke Codegear support in some places. Unfortunately I don't have Codegear available to test with locally. Can you link me to the regressions you think this has caused? I'm looking through them right now, not seeing anything.
Feel free to revert at your own discretion.
Okay. I will.
I would argue, though, that by the same logic, boost::detail::numeric_traits, boost::detail::iterator_traits, etc, shouldn't be used.
boost::detail::numeric_traits does not replace anything in the standard. I consider boost::detail::iterator_traits to be obsolete. However, even if someone wanted to use it, the situation is a bit different, since some of the problems that it avoids are not transient, and replacing iterator is not a viable solution. Anyone planning to use your setup with a broken iomanip for the long term is just insane, and I see no reason to support it. If you put this in, we'll end up with code that nobody needs lying around forever. In Christ, Steven Watanabe