Re: [boost] [config] request for BOOST_NO_FWD_STD_DECLARATION

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] request for BOOST_NO_FWD_STD_DECLARATION
From: Ilya Sokolov (ilyasokol_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-24 23:55:44

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:00:05 +0500, Stewart, Robert  
<Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Ilya Sokolov wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 18:20:14 +0500, Stewart, Robert
>> <Robert.Stewart_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> > The implementer may declare std types with template
>> > parameters beyond those named in the standard, provided the
>> > extras are defaulted so the types work as if they didn't
>> > have the extra template parameters.
>>
>> No. See
>> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-closed.html#94
>
> I think the committee was disingenuous to declare the standard clear as  
> written when Pete Becker got it wrong: http://bit.ly/hXpupO.

+1. Looks like 'clear as written' means something else for the committee ).

> Still, that issue does prove me wrong.  Thanks for the clarification.
>
> _____
> Rob Stewart                           robert.stewart_at_[hidden]
> Software Engineer, Core Software      using std::disclaimer;
> Susquehanna International Group, LLP  http://www.sig.com