El 31/03/2012 14:48, Vicente J. Botet Escriba escribió:
Have you a plan to add these definitions at the boost level?
I don't think we should modify anything at boost level before reaching consensus on the mailing as it might potentially affect many users. <memory> includes scoped_allocator_adaptor, should we add it? boost::container::scoped_allocator_adaptor is dependent on many boost.container and boost.intrusive, so it does not seem a good idea (maybe we are missing a boost.allocator library). It also includes smart pointers, uninitialized_xxx functions, allocator_traits... Another option is to define uses_allocator.hpp, allocator_arg.hpp, etc. We'll have the same problem with many C++11 features to be backported to C++03 compilers so a general rule should be discussed in the mailing list. Best, Ion