Re: [boost] [endian] Comments on Endian 0.5

Daryle Walker wrote :

Why would being copy-constructible forbid POD-ness? Obviously, adding a copy constructor to a class/struct/union would disqualify it from being POD. But that's not the only way to define copying. The automatic copy constructor does _not_ cancel POD qualification, since is a dumb bitwise copy for PODs, and should still count as copy-constructible as far as STL is concerned. (If an explicit copy construction operation actually is required, then the concept is broken. It not like you can improperly use a constructor by getting its member-function address.)

As I clearly said, I was talking about the endian types. And they require a custom constructor.