From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-07 15:07:07
These is purely release related. I don't have an opinion on the issue
Peter Dimov wrote:
> Currently the Boost.TR1 <memory> fails one conformance test,
> bad_weak_ptr::what() returns 'boost::bad_weak_ptr' and it should return
> Any violent objections against changing it to conform in HEAD?
> Any ordinary objections against changing it in 1.34 as well?
If it's OK for head, it's OK for 1.34.0.
-- Thomas Witt witt_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk