More test results...

[Jason Merrill]

>>>>> "Benjamin" == Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz@redhat.com> writes:

>> True.  But if it only has meaning as a specialization, why was the change
>> useful in the first place?

> Compatibility testing revealed that there were duplicate symbols due to 
> compiler oddnesses.

Right but why were there implicit instantiations being generated?  If there
hadn't been, the problem wouldn't have been noticed.

> At this point, I think the preference is to keep the code the way it is
> now.

Okeedokee.

> If you've actually fixed the static const issue, then perhaps the stl 
> changes to enums can be reverted. Thoughts?

I haven't been following that discussion, sorry.

Jason