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

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-25 05:37:04

> 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?

They're only done in the sense that for a while we had two aligned_storage 
classes in cvs: a strictly conforming TR1 version and the old version: I 
removed the new version just to get things working again, after consultation 
with Eric Friedman the plan was to deprecate the old version eventually. 
However.... on reflection it's too close to release, so I'll do what Peter 
suggested, and just make sure that aligned_storage::type conforms to the TR, 
even though aligned_storage itself contains all kinds of "enhancements". 
That won't affect any existing code BTW.

John.