This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: CHECKLIST and "implementation defined"
On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 03:22:06PM -0700, Nathan Myers wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 05:33:35PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
> >
> > I don't consider the iterators to be "partially implemented or buggy,"
> > so this is a proposal to upgrade their status to T. Thoughts?
>
> Agreed. IIRC they started out as "partial" because of things like
> vector<> and basic_string<> iterators implemented as pointers, and
> not being derived from iterator<>.
That's the only thing I could think of, too, but wanted to check.
> I wonder if there are new elements introduced in TC1. Seems like
> there may have been some mem_fun follies.
To use managerspeak, TC1 is not even on my radar with respect to my
intended changes to CHECKLIST. And won't be, until I get a copy of it,
so that may be a while.
Phil
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek
not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you;
and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. - Samuel Adams