"John Maddock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I found that boost has very powerful configuration system >> (boost/config.hpp and around...) >> but why use macros? >> there is another solution described here, let discuss it... >> may be there are some troubles, invisible for me, that prevent from using >> this technique >> in libraries like boost? > > I think that there are two problems: > > 1) Your scheme requires that all possible implementations can be parsed by > the compiler - that won't be true for macros describing defects. > 2) Your scheme can't cope with optional features (long long or > <someheader.h>). > > Oh, and macros are probably simpler, if ugly.
Yeah, the effort it would take to implement and maintain a one-line workaround in a 20-line function for different compilers would go through the roof. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
