[boost] erroneous use of BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT ?

When using BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT, the member still need to be _defined_ in a .cpp file (IIUC 9.4.2 par 4 of the standard), unless the enum-trick is used, right? However gcc, intel-linux and the mipspro compiler (and probably others) do not require a seperate definition. OTOH IBM/VisualAge does really _need_ the definition (otherwise the symbols are undefined when linking). Would'nt it be better to advise library-developers to use an enum instead of BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT if their library does not contain a definition? toon