>>>>> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Ah, you mean explicit test on ENABLE_ASSERTIONS? There are two >> uses, and they are indeed not needed. Abdelrazak> At last! So could be said for the majority of the used Abdelrazak> macro. IMO, we should at least get rid of 61 unused macro Abdelrazak> and proceed with the other with a one by one procedure. You cannot get rid of these "61 unused macros". >> I understand what you want to do, but there are some things for >> which we need config.h. For example: CXX_GLOBAL_CSTD, >> DEVEL_VERSION, concept checking and stdlib-debug stuff. Note also >> that config.h defines some types that are not existing in some >> systems. I think that having a place where we can propagate stuff >> to all files is very important. Abdelrazak> I agree but my point is that, in a cleanup source code, Abdelrazak> these macro should only affect src/support/*.C Did you read what I wrote? concept checking? stdlib-debug? Do you want to link against two different versions of std::string? DEVEL_VERSION is used in src/ (to show some info in the minibuffer). I think you need to cleanup all the source code before you can even think of removing config.h in src/. What about ccache instead? >> It would be better if autoconf allowed us to have several separate >> config.h files with different uses. This is unfortunately not >> possible, unless we use several configure files Abdelrazak> IMHO, we should at least have a "boost_config.h". It is not so easy, because autoconf sucks at this. >> (do you want that? It is going to be even slower). Abdelrazak> This is another problem, I know nothing about autotools Abdelrazak> and I am not interested in learning. This is aging stuff, Abdelrazak> really. Unix is aging stuff. All of us are, unfortunately. JMarc
