From: boost (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-09 05:34:47
Dear all,
On Wednesday 07 August 2002 18:45, Peter Schmitteckert (boost) wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> ibm xlC visual age 6.0 complains on following typedefs in ublas:
>
> typedef reverse_iterator1<iterator1> reverse_iterator1;
> typedef reverse_iterator2<const_iterator2> const_reverse_iterator2;
>
I had to change the typedefs to
typedef boost::numeric::ublas::reverse_iterator1<iterator1> reverse_iterator1;
Looking at the April draft it's not clear to me, wether xlC is correct or not.
Best wishes,
Peter