[boost] Re: type_traits - almost there?

From: (nil)
Date: 2000-02-07 08:26:53

> You had me worried there for a minute - but checking the standard I'm
> fairly sure that if a type is a POD then the default constructor is
> trivial:
>
> ...
>
> Those definitions are actually pretty tight, I don't see how any
POD-struct
> type can fail to have a trivial default constructor given those rules -
did
> you have a specific case in mind?
>

No, you're right, John.  POD classes do have to have trivial default
constructors.

        -Steve