Re: What's wrong with <limits>?

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

Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com> writes:

| On Sat, Apr 26, 2003 at 04:08:36PM +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com> writes:
| > | 
| > | I'm trying to update 17_intro/CHECKLIST, which hasn't been touched in four
| > | years.  If there's something you /know/ that isn't conforming about limits,
| > | then the comment makes sense.  If you think it's conforming, let's remove it.
| > 
| > Then, I didn't make an in-depth auditing to make sure we have a
| > conforming implementation now.  I would say, leave it alone.
| 
| That sounds like there still needs to be a change in numeric_limits'
| entry in CHECKLIST, then, given the possible status codes.  Could you
| take a brief look at the top of CHECKLIST?  Right now limits is an 'X'.
| Your description above sounds more like a 'T'.

It is either X or T. Can you have both?

-- Gaby