From: Björn Karlsson (Bjorn.Karlsson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-09-26 08:28:55
> From: David Abrahams [mailto:dave_at_[hidden]]
> Does this help?
Yes, that helps, thanks!
>See the thread starting with
>especially my reply to
Thanks, I'm feeling enlightened!
Now there's just the small question of how to resolve the issues at hand...
I see three options:
0) Apply the patches as they come along - there are ~800
BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT's to be (reported and) augmented with
1) Add the #ifdef:ed BOOST_NO_INCLASS_MEMBER_INITIALIZATION wherever there's
BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT. Naturally, this is also ~800 occurences.
2) Change the config for this (conforming, but let's forget that for now)
compiler, and #define BOOST_NO_INCLASS_MEMBER_INITIALIZATION. Be it a hack
or not, it's a one-liner.
Would anyone be terribly upset if I go with option 2?
Both 0 and 1 would be painful (not only because of the sheer number, but
also because it will need to change again once the Standard changes, which
in turn would result in YAM [Yet Another Macro] to be used for changing
What do you think?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk