Paul Mensonides wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > <snip> > > > > > #define C C > > > > #if C > > X() > > #endif > > > > Wave spits out that this is an ill-formed preprocessor expression - > > The expression of an #if (or #elif) directive should get four passes. > The first pass handles the defined operator. Each instance of defined > XYZ and defined(XYZ) is replaced with 0 or 1. The second pass does > macro expansion. For the expression above, macro expansion results in > C. The third pass converts all remaining identifier tokens, with the > exception of true and false, with 0. (Note that that alternative tokens > are not identifiers, so this doesn't apply to them.) Finally, yielding > the expression 0. The fourth pass finally evaluates the expression, > which should evaluate to false. >
This was my understanding too, which is why I claimed that my wave executable might be buggy. Does your wave executable also puke on the above snippet - if it does not, then i think my wave's behavior may be an artifact of my "dirty" fix to get the code to compile by declaring a primary template in order to make the explicit specialization of "policy..." well-formed. I have not studied the source code for wave yet - and before (or if) i do, i was hoping if someone could confirm or deny experiencing the same behavior with their wave executable. regards, Faisal Vali _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
