Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 04:11:09 +0200, David Abrahams wrote: > >> David Abrahams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> >>>> Hi Dave, >>>> >>>> I checked in a fix for checked_delete.hpp for the Metrowerks CW8 to >>>> CVS HEAD. It was created in cooperation with Howard and I'm positiv >>>> that it's a good one-size-fits-all solution. I don't know about your >>>> shedule for 1.30.2, but you might want to consider merging it to >>>> RC_1_30_0. I will not push this as I don't want to delay 1.30.2, >>>> having it in 1.31.0 is fine, too. >>> >>> Hmm, I use Pro8.3 all the time and have never seen a need for a patch >>> to checked_delete. Ah, the regressions were in expected-failure > tests? > > The regression depends on the compiler flags. It occurs with "-iso_templates > on" which - according to Howard - is a good idea to use. Personally, I > have no clue what it's good for... :)
It enables conformance ;-) Of course all of my compiles and the Boost regression tests are run using -iso_templates on. >> OK, I like your patch and I've applied it in the branch. I'm going to >> release tomorrow morning after the meta-comm regressions have run again. > > Thanks. I'll keep my fingers crossed... Still no joy :( -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
