A crazy thought - how about enabling something like this:
#include boost/function.hpp
#include cassert
int main()
{
boost::functionbool () f0 = true;
boost::functionint () f1 = -1;
boost::functionstd::string () f2= text;
assert(f0() == true);
Hello,
this little test program
#include boost/preprocessor.hpp
int main() { return 0; }
is compiled fine by gcc 2.95.3 and gcc 3.0.4.
However gcc 3.1/3.2 (and 3.3) produce errors:
In file included from /home/boost/boost/preprocessor/array.hpp:18,
from
- Original Message -
From: Martin Wille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Boost mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 1:20 AM
Subject: [boost] Problems with preprocessor.hpp and gcc
Hello,
this little test program
#include boost/preprocessor.hpp
int main() { return
Can whoever added this one, please add it to the docs (as a feature macro).
Is it possible to test for this? If so can a test program be supplied
please - the test program should compile and run only if the feature is
available - see one of the boost_has_XXX.cxx files for examples.
John
On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 19:34:50 -0500, David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can/should we add something to the config, like
e.g. BOOST_DINKUMWARE_STD?
My opinion? No :-)
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/1379052
Genny.
___
Unsubscribe
On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 06:04 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
So no need to guess, except in the case of a system which supports
multiple system specific formats.
It's a kind of funny situation.
Mac OS X does of course have enough POSIX support that the POSIX
implementation can be used. But
No, that gets too messy. Tests should be separate, IMO, and not fire
automatically on a rebuild.
It's on my todo list to separate the Jamfile. Soon, very soon...
Jeff
___
Unsubscribe other changes:
David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Douglas Gregor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Saturday 09 November 2002 02:22 pm, Victor A. Wagner, Jr. wrote:
Maybe it's my expectations that are out of whack.
Are there any rules for what's commited to the CVS main branch?
There are no rules. The
Douglas Gregor wrote:
On Saturday 09 November 2002 07:21 pm, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
[snip some code...]
template typename T yes_tag is_callable_helper(
sink sizeof(T::operator()) *
);
[snip more code...]
Won't work if there are multiple overloads of operator()
Paul Mensonides wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Aleksey Gurtovoy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, I also happened to think that would be a preferred way to get
equivalent of the hypothetical '__is_well_formed(...)' functionality.
However, assuming that we got that one or another way,
On Saturday, November 9, 2002, at 11:23 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
it sounds to me as if boost::filesystem::path's system_specific
constructor and access functions should be used for Macintosh style
paths, and the generic constructor and access functions (as always) be
used for generic (ie
Is there any interest in a threaded function queue? I ran into a problem
where I needed to asynchronously run methods but I didn't want to (or
actually couldn't easlily) maintain threads to run them in. So I created a
function queue where I could control the number of threads that were used to
12 matches
Mail list logo
