In article <3cb0acc3@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> 
wrote:

>   At least gcc 2.x does not support the standard in this case (I haven't
> the slightest idea why).
>   I don't know about gcc 3.x (I haven't tried).

I'm developing it using Apple's modified version of gcc 2.95.2.
Obviously, vector::at() works here...maybe Apple fixed that part.

It seems like such a simple and basic thing that it would be surprising 
for even the least complete and compliant implementation to lack it. In 
the next version I'll use the [] operator instead...

-- 
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message