"Vesa Karvonen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Abrahams:
>>Paul Mensonides:
>> > The semantic change is that 'x' must not be a function-like macro. What do
>> > you think?
>>
>>I think that rules out most of the use-cases Vesa was interested in
>>addressing with this :(
>
> Well, it does rule out some use-cases, and it is not ideal to have such limitations,
>but it should
> still be useful for testing whether an object-like macro, such as an include guard,
>or a config
> macro, has been defined. I think that there are many uses for the
> macro.
How can you use a macro which only tells you if a function-like macro
is defined to tell you if an object-like macro is defined?
If we could do that, couldn't you implement your original intended
semantics?
--
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
