David Abrahams wrote:
"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Hmmm ... I was aware of the theoretical possibility of this problem, but I didn't know there was actual boost code relying on ADL with std::min/std::max.
I don't see the problem. Wasn't the intention only to replace qualified std::min and std::max with (std::min) and (std::max)?
The intention was to remove the min/max hack from win32.hpp, and then fix all the places where the min/max macros would otherwise wreak havoc. That isn't limitted to qualified called to std::min and std::max. It also includes unqualified calls to min/max, and also calls to numeric_limits<foo>::max, and the declarations and invocations of all min/max member functions. -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com