[boost] Re: current_function.hpp extension

From: Daniel Frey (daniel.frey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-18 15:02:38

Peter Dimov wrote:
> There is currently no BOOST_HAS_CURRENT_FUNCTION since the idealistic goal
> has been to cover all widely used compilers one day, so that
> BOOST_CURRENT_FUNCTION always has a meaningful value. This may prove to be
> impractical, of course, but I'd certainly prefer patches that enable
> BOOST_CURRENT_FUNCTION to work with more compilers over just adding
> BOOST_HAS_CURRENT_FUNCTION. :-)

Agreed that it is desirable to have this on as many platforms as 
possible. Also I've seen from the CVS that the Intel compiler is 
supported in the next version, too. So at least I no longer need it. :) 
OTOH a BOOST_HAS_CURRENT_FUNCTION is a very lightwave extension which 
doesn't prevent patches that add support for more compilers..

> On the other hand, perhaps you have a use case that clearly demonstrates the
> need for BOOST_HAS_CURRENT_FUNCTION?

I have a very small use case which might not sound very convincing: The 
Log-files are smaller if I know when to omit the "(unknown)". As the 
function name would appear on each log-line, and assuming an average 
log-line-length of 200 chars, this would be 5%. But there are a lot of 
other ways to switch the (unknown) on and off, I just thought that it 
makes sense to retrieve this information at its root. No big deal if 
it's not there. :)

Regards, Daniel

-- 
Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology
Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany
fon: [phone], fax: [phone]
eMail: daniel.frey_at_[hidden], web: http://www.aixigo.de