Re: user-defined types and basic_string

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com> writes:

| The other idea, of course, is to do nothing and let the present code
| stand. I'm inclined to side with Matt here, and leave std::char_traits
| generic undefined.

I undertand Matt's arguments -- and I find them quite convincing.
However, Martin Sebor seems to imply that some people do find the
primary template definition useful, and given recent questions by
Andreas, I would be willing to provide users means to use the
primary templates where possible without going through repetitions.
But I don't have any strong feeling about it -- understanding both
sides and my personal opinion being removing char_traits<> :-).

So, if other people here find the idea worth the trouble then I can
provide a patch; if not then I would return to my numerical limits
patch (available soon!) :-)

-- Gaby