[boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-03-05 Thread Fernando Cacciola
FYI, with Update 4 __BORLANDC__==0x564 Fernando Cacciola ___ Unsubscribe other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

Re: [boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Paul Mensonides
Beman Dawes wrote: Pavel, Official patch 4 was released just now: http://bdn.borland.com/article/0,1410,29793,00.html Among bugs fixed is: - The bcc compiler now compiles code containing a const member function. Hum... Interesting... Thanks for letting me know. Could some

[boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Russell Hind
Paul Mensonides wrote: Beman Dawes wrote: #define A() 1 #define B(m) m 2 B(A) I've run the above through the preprocessor and heres the output /* Unit1.cpp 1: */ /* Unit1.cpp 2: */ /* Unit1.cpp 3: */ /* Unit1.cpp 4: */A 2 Tested using the preprocess option with BCB6Pro Update 4. This looks

Re: [boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Paul Mensonides
Russell Hind wrote: #define A() 1 #define B(m) m 2 B(A) I've run the above through the preprocessor and heres the output /* Unit1.cpp 1: */ /* Unit1.cpp 2: */ /* Unit1.cpp 3: */ /* Unit1.cpp 4: */A 2 Tested using the preprocess option with BCB6Pro Update 4. This looks like what

Re: [boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Paul Mensonides
Russell Hind wrote: Sorry to say that the output is now incorrect. A2 instead of A 2. Checking the preprocessor output for this gives /* Unit1.cpp 9: */int main() { /* Unit1.cpp 10: */std::cout A 2 std::endl; /* Unit1.cpp 11: */return 0; which is again correct. This is strange since I

[boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Russell Hind
FYI I've submitted it as QC#3629 Russell Paul Mensonides wrote: Russell Hind wrote: Sorry to say that the output is now incorrect. A2 instead of A 2. Checking the preprocessor output for this gives /* Unit1.cpp 9: */int main() { /* Unit1.cpp 10: */std::cout A 2 std::endl; /* Unit1.cpp 11:

[boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Alisdair Meredith
Beman Dawes wrote: But I really don't want to change compilers in the midst of a release runup. So I've stuck a note on my calendar for March 12th to install the patch. If anyone thinks this is a problem, let me know. Assuming a new version number for __BORLANDC__ it might throw out some of

Re: [boost] Re: Borland C++ Builder patch 4 released

2003-02-27 Thread Samuel Krempp
On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 13:58, Alisdair Meredith wrote: [Could make config testing interesting if 0x0563 has fixes not present in the Kylix release, 0x0570] indeed. I guess it's the first time, thanks to Borland's 2 branches (kylix / Borland C++ Builder) using intertwined version numbers, that