Re: [boost] Two alined_storage classes in the CVS

John Maddock wrote:

Darn, normally I'd say that the older version has priority over the name, however in this case since aligned_storage is part of the TR, I'm leaning toward agreeing that we should rename the old version.

My question may be naive, because I have no idea what the TR is, but what would be the problem with putting all of the TR code in a boost::tr namespace? Are there pieces of the tr already in use? -Jason