[boost] Re: additional test for is_abstract type trait

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-30 06:58:37

Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:

> Yes. Pavel proposes to add this informative macro and *no* workaround, so
> that it's up to the user to use is_abstract in defective compilers (even
> risking a crash) or build some internal logic to avoid it based on the macro.
> 
> Thinking about it, I tend to agree with Pavel and you: returning false is not
> necessarily a reasonable default, so I'd go for the macro, only (and ask
> Robert to fix his hack in Boost.Serialization.)

It seems to me that true is the appropriate safe default for 
is_abstract.  Am I missing something?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com