https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #19 from Victor Mataré <matare at lih dot rwth-aachen.de> --- > I'm not suggesting anything radical or novel, just the standard way to use > iostreams. I'd call that "the legacy way" or the "C-like pattern". Call it "predominant" or "established" if you wish. But The Standard also defines an intuitive, modern, exception-driven error handling, and I (probably along with every other developer who dislikes leaky abstractions) really don't see why I shouldn't be using it. Obviously the transition issues after the inheritance change were foreseeable, so I'd expect the C++11 standard or any accompanying document to mention it. Or does the standardization and the resulting guidance deliberately exclude deployment issues such as this? Maybe anyone with more insight into the standardization process knows anything about this?
