[PATCH] Fix PR libstdc++/13462 std::set's pointer is not right

[Stephen M. Webb]

On Monday, December 22 2003 22:17, Matt Austern wrote:
>
> It's also all mostly irrelevant.  It only matters if users supply
> an allocator where Alloc::pointer is something other than
> Alloc::value_type*.  In principle this is allowed by the standard
> (sort of).  In practice, if we want to support it we have to do a
> fair amount of work.  Changing the container's pointer type is the
> least of it.
>
> (I can get into details of what we'd have to do, if anyone is
> curious.)

I'm curious.  Not only has it always been one of those "now how would I..." 
exercises, but recently I came across a situation where it could prove 
useful.

Would the new operator need to be modified to deal with a non-naked pointer?

--
Stephen M. Webb
stephen.webb@bregmasoft.com