"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I agree completely, and I'll even promise not to change my mind for at least
> a week :-)
Good! You, Aleksey and I all agree. So shall we go with this definition
of BOOST_WORKAROUND from Gennaro Prota?
#define BOOST_WORKAROUND(symbol, test) ((symbol != 0) && (symbol test))
And, I suggest
BOOST_WORKAROUND(__BORLANDC__, |0x569)
As the standard "comment" about the last known version where the
workaround is needed.
--
David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
