Re: [boost] config/conformance issue

From: Dave Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-01 05:34:09

on 5/31/00 8:55 PM, jsiek_at_[hidden] at jsiek_at_[hidden] wrote:

> 4. Do what STLport does, and bring those names into std if necessary.

1. That's a privilege reserved to implementations (when you use the STLport
you are changing implementations).
2. I don't want to get into the business of trying to make non-conforming
compilers look conforming to code outside boost. That really seems outside
our charter.
3. The STLport doesn't put them into std, strictly speaking. It brings them
into its own namespace and then re-#defines std. That sort of thing seems a
bit too heavy-handed for boost.

-Dave