Re: [libstdc++-v3] Remove std::construct and std::destroy

[Stephen M. Webb <stephen at bregmasoft dot com>]

On Mon, 02 Jul 2001, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> I just checked it in to the trunk. I'm uncertain what to do with patches 
> that remove functions from std:: or otherwise change the library 
> significantly. (Say this patch, or the iterator work.) Right now I'm now 
> checking them into the branch, although this might be a mistake.

I was of the opinion that getting nonstandard names out of std:: as soon
as possible would be a good thing, because there would be less opportunity
for people to adopt their use (vis. the fd constructor in iostreams), but it's
not a strident opinion.

I have a similar patch in the pipe to remove some additional HP names that
are not a part of the standard.  While I won't suggest this next patch go on the
branch, I would like some opinion as to whether the nonstandard functions should
be removed entirely (definition and all), have their definitions remain in the
library but be unused by the library itself, or have their definitions moved
into a backwards header.


Stephen M. Webb