Re: [boost] boost::config and covariant return types

From: f-boost_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-09-27 17:51:11

I just came into this, so feel free to ignore me.  Comments inline
with quotes.

"Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_[hidden]> writes:

> However, I think you'd agree that in order to write any piece of portable
> code such a header is REQUIRED.

Agreed.

> Therefore, the questions are how,when and by whom is such a header created.

Agreed.

> If it won't be part of a vendor's standard library (though it
> generally is, as a private part of it), then I *strongly recommend*
> having boost\config.hpp be targeted to the end user, not just boost
> developers.

I think that a copy-and-paste method is more desirable.  It's the
standards-conformance argument again: non-conformity can be worked
around, but why standardize it?

Do I necessarily wish to include all of the configuration magic that
you wish to include?  Do you necessarily wish to provide me all of the
configuration information that I wish to include?  Will you always be
up on the latest version of my compiler, or in some cases might I have
to hack your config header?