> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Frey
> Exactly. But the expanded <some_class<...>> is the result of the > preprocessor, so IIRC the two >'s are treated as two tokens, > not as one, > because they weren't glued together with ##. Also, the GCC > preprocessor > expands the above to > > < some_class<...> > > > and I'm pretty sure that the rules for inserting spaces are exactly > defined and there is not much room for interpretation. If the GCC is > correct to insert spaces, then the patch is a work-around for > a compiler > (here: preprocessor) bug. So, what is the correct behaviour here? It isn't technically supposed to insert spaces, but it is supposed to treat them as two consecutive tokens with no whitespace separation--same as "+-". You can get this situation similar to the following: #define MACRO(a) a> MACRO(>) The result is: '>' '>' Not: '>' ' ' '>' And definitely not: '>>' E.g. they are distinct, but a preprocessor shouldn't be adding whitespace *unless* it is producing a text stream which is going to be re-tokenized by a separate preprocessor/compiler pass. In that case, it *must* add the whitespace to prevent retokenization that yields different tokens. Regards, Paul Mensonides _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
