[boost] Hello?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-14 06:23:55

David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:

> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> That sounds like what I did for version 1.32.   
>
> Is it equivalent to what you did, or does it just sound reminiscent?
>
>> I considered a very ugly hack.  
>               ^
>               "it?"
>
>> I don't think I was the only person that felt this way.  I resolved
>> to fix it in the next version - and here we are. oh well.
>
> Surely you don't think the recommendation I'm suggesting for
> conforming compilers is an ugly hack?
>
> IMO it doesn't matter much how ugly the portable-to-broken-compilers
> workaround is, as long as it's legit for the conforming ones and
> doesn't induce maintenance problems.

So do you have anything to say about this?

I hate to be a pest, but I've sunk so much time into getting these
issues remedied that I'm unwilling to have the issue evaporate into
the past without getting addressed.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com