codecvt as an abstract base class

[Paolo Carlini]

Hi,
> By the way, what was the rationale for specifying std::codecvt not to declare its virtual members pure virtual, and not specifying any implementation either?
>
> Is the intent that they be left dangling to produce link errors, or that dummy implementations (for example, throw an exception in every case) should be added? (What does everyone think of the latter option? Paolo?)
>   
frankly, at the moment I'm in the middle of way too many things to give
a sensible contribution to this specific discussion. I'm sorry.

To keep the focus on concrete issues, I would suggest also considering

    http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16006

when returning to codecvt (see in particular Comment 6), it's something
people would really like to see us delivering.

Paolo.