On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 23:20:06 +0200, Peter Dimov wrote: > Daniel Frey wrote: >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 22:22:03 +0200, Peter Dimov wrote: >> >>>> +#include <boost/config.hpp> >>>> +#if defined(BOOST_INTEL) >>>> +#include <boost/static_assert.hpp> >>>> +#endif >>> >>> Dependencies. I hate dependencies. >> >> Do you have a better idea? > > Several, like (1) using __INTEL_COMPILER for detection and (2) isolating > the minimal example that results in the error we need. But I don't have > access to Intel C++.
(1) Look into config/compilers/intel.hpp, it's not that easy. I do have access to the Intel compiler, but of course not to all versions. And I only use Linux, thus a single platform. I simply used all the knowledge and experience compiled into the config-system as this is what it is supposed to provide, right? But I can duplicate the config's code if you want to detach checked_delete from the config system... (2) This is only included for the Intel compiler and I prefer code clarity here over duplicating strange work-around code. Actually BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT nicely encapsulates this. Or do you know of any actual problem by introducting the dependency? It's IMHO the smaller evil here... Regards, Daniel PS: While adding the comments Dave asked for, I also added a comment to my local copy about the explicit namespace qualification in checked_deleter to prevent ADL, as this is also not obvious from the code alone why it's required. Should be OK, right? :) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
