Re: [boost] Re: fix: intel.hpp

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-25 12:01:58

Gennaro Prota <gennaro_prota_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 11:25:15 -0400, David Abrahams
> <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>>OK, what if it were changed to:
>>
>>#  if !(defined(_WCHAR_T_DEFINED) || defined(_NATIVE_WCHAR_T_DEFINED))
>>#     define BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_WCHAR_T
>>#  endif
>>
>>??
>
> No. I don't know if the meaning of _WCHAR_T_DEFINED has been changed
> with the latest VC and/or Intel but certainly the above doesn't work
> with version 6, of both compilers. The point is that _WCHAR_T_DEFINED
> isn't actually an indicator of intrinsic-ness; it gets, for instance,
> manually defined in the library headers:
>
>
>  #ifndef _WCHAR_T_DEFINED
>  typedef unsigned short wchar_t;
>  #define _WCHAR_T_DEFINED
>  #endif
>
> Client code assumes that wchar_t is a distinct type, unless
> BOOST_NO_INTRINSIC_WCHAR_T is defined. So the above change would break
> the typical usage:

OK, this is too complicated and I don't understand the issues; I'm
just going to roll back that part of my last change.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com