Boost logo

Boost :

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-29 05:15:15

> The following regressions in gcc-2.95.3-linux
> are IMHO due to the fact that bad_alloc is defined in <new>,
> and this header is not included by the corresponding test programs.
> I'd say it's only out of sheer luck (dependant inclusions) that
> these tests works for the rest of compilers, but I might be wrong.
> In any case, #including <new> solves the problem. If noone
> sees a problem with these patches, I'll commit them.

Good pick up: for some reason I thought bad_alloc was defined in
<exception>, but you're right it's in <new>, so go ahead and commit your
fix. Ironic that it was an obsolete compiler that picked this up :-)



Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at