From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-19 13:44:41
David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> At 03:59 AM 11/18/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>> >Do we need a different test? Was this added for intel/Linux?
>> No, Win32. It was odd, IIRC, in that the change caused
>> is_convertible_test to fail, but without the change perhaps a
>> half-dozen other tests failed.
>> I think I mentioned it at the time, but don't remember getting any
> I'd like to know more about what was failing without it, because the
> patch is breaking code which I need to work.
In other words, it's breaking more than just is_convertible_test:
is_convertible itself is effectively broken.
Specifically, I'd like to find another way to fix the other problems
which doesn't break is_convertible, but without more info it's pretty
hard to do. Resolving the iterator library issues depends on this.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk