On Tuesday 10 December 2002 10:54, David Abrahams wrote: > Toon Knapen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Long time ago I inquired if it would be a good idea to provide STL > > extensions in boost that are not implemented by all STL's. IIRC David A > > responded that boost/compatibility was intended for this. > > That sort of surprises me.
Sorry if I've unrightfully put words in your mounth. > I think they should go in boost, for sure, > but I thought the compatibility library was about fixing broken > std library implementations. This is really Ralf's bailiwick, though. > Ralf? To which Ralf responded : >I don't really have an opinion regarding Toon's proposal, but my gut feeling >is >that compatibility with the ISO standard is very different from compatibility >with someone's extensions. Maybe something like "extension adaptor" library >is >more appropriate? what about boost/stl_extension /? toon _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
