Hi Ion, I noticed that you fixed the issue comprehensively, replacing the quick fix that I had made for it. Thank you very much for being so quick and responsive with these issues. I would nominate you for the "best boost maintainer award", if one existed! My own code now works without any issue, thanks to your implementation of n3644 compliance in Boost.Container/Intrusive. In the process of implementing my own fix for n3644, I had a chance to take a cross-section look into the inner workings of Boost.Container/Intrusive. I would just like to make a general observation about it. I find that there is a lot of stuff under there. I understand that a robust library like Container or Intrusive cannot be as simple under-the-hood as a naive re-implementation of STL containers (i.e., a basic naive re-implementation of std::vector might take a couple of hundred lines of code, while a more production-quality one will take significantly more code than that). However, I think it's important to keep compilation times in mind. When I originally switched my BGL code from STL containers to Boost.Container, I noticed a pretty significant (almost crippling) increase in compilation times and memory-consumption. I understand that it can be neat to have, for example, a single iterator class template to implement iterators for all node-based containers (list, slist, map, set, etc.), but it requires heavy template meta-programming to make that happen without too much run-time overhead, leading to an increase in compilation time and memory. I'm not sure that this trade-off is really to the advantage of the users. I've learned to favour simple mechanics under-the-hood even if it implies a certain amount of code repetition, instead of the fancier or more elegant TMP mechanics, which I have regretted using in the past due to compilation times, memory and bloated diagnostics and debugging. That's just an opinion I thought I should share with you, and something for you to keep in mind for future coding iterations on the library (suggestion: create some comparative compilation time/memory benchmarks between STL implementations and the Boost.Container implementation, and try to aim to remain comparable to them). Thanks, Mikael.