Re: [boost] Re: aligned_storage not a POD?

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-24 08:06:02

David Abrahams wrote:
> "John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>>> Good idea.  Who is responsible for this code?
>>
>> A while ago I promised a patch that would:
>>
>> 1) Shift the code into boost/type_traits,
>> 2) Make it TR1 conforming.
>> 3) Apply patches to existing clients of aligned_storage.
>>
>> I haven't got around to (3) yet, but there's a good chance I'll do
>> it early next week.
>
> I don't understand what 3 might entail.  Are these fixes to
> aligned_storage already done, and how can they possibly cause clients
> to require being patched?

I think that it would be easier to just define a proper ::type in 
aligned_storage (data_t, the type of its data_ member, should do). The test 
needs to be fixed first, of course.