John Maddock wrote:
I don't think that it's necessary to be that complicated:
1) If the type *is* really abstract, then numeric_limits support probably doesn't make sense since the type is not a "value" type. So filtering out abstract types probably makes sense whatever.
2) If a type is *not* abstract and the compiler supports numeric_limits then we're OK anyway I think?
Exactly this reasoning drove me to the current fix.
3) If the compiler is broken and doesn't support is_abstract, then users can always specialise is_abstract for a non-abstract polymorphic type if they want the numeric limits code to kick in.
In this situation, I decided to use numeric_limits. As I wrote in other post, we'll see how it works. If it doesn't work well, we can switch to your proposal and update compatibility section of the docs. -- Alexander Nasonov http://nasonov.blogspot.com Chicago sounds rough to the maker of verse. One comfort we have: Cincinnati sounds worse. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes -- This quote is generated by: /usr/pkg/bin/curl -L http://tinyurl.com/veusy \ | sed -e 's/^document\.write(.//' -e 's/.);$/ --/' \ -e 's/<[^>]*>//g' -e 's/^More quotes from //' \ | fmt | tee ~/.signature-quote