http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46906
--- Comment #8 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> 2011-09-05 12:56:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > Oh, are you saying that this rule has priority over the one that says that > operator* just forwards to sgetc? This was not my intention, but I recognize that my last response can be read that way. > That would actually require istreambuf_iterator to keep the last value in > cache the way libstdc++ does. This is not required, but I don't see why this should be excluded by the specification. Why do you think that either implementation form could be considered as non-conforming?
