Re: [boost] Re: boost and CW6 Mac problems

From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-15 20:17:33

David Abrahams wrote on 10/15/2000 4:30 PM
>I also think that this solution is "More OK", since after all, any library's
>interface of these non-standard elements may differ in arbitrary ways. One
>thing we could do, for example, is to "simply" hijack these classes from
>STLport. Even that solution is likely to amount to lots of work, and will
>have some undesirable side-effects (e.g., some users will wish we were using
>their library's built-in component). I'm not sure it's worth it.

What about hijacking the native implementation, if available?  Maybe 
something along the lines of:

#ifndef BOOST_NO_SLIST

#include <slist>

namespace boost
{

        #ifdef __MWERKS__
                using Metrowerks::slist;
        #else
                using std::slist;
        #endif

}

#endif  // BOOST_NO_SLIST

Of course this would only work if the interface of the various 
implementations is common enough for boost's uses.  I'm not positive 
whether or not that is the case, but I think it is a possibility worth 
exploring.  If there are differences causing problems, perhaps the boost 
version could just serve as an adapter from the native interface to the 
common interface.

This approach would expose the strengths and weaknesses of different 
implementations which would ultimately better serve the C++ standard 
should slist or the hash containers be adopted into it.

-Howard