From: Alisdair Meredith (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-07-21 04:21:10
John Torjo wrote:
> Yes, I remain unconvinced ;-)
> This is because some compilers do not provide such a FUNCTION facility.
> VC6 is one of them. What should I do for it?
It sounds like you are asking for the wrong macro!
You are trying to support a compiler that is outdated and long since
replaced (but remains in widespread use) A FUNCTION_NAME patch is
unlikely to become available.
Rather than assuming BOOST_FUNCTION_NAME is not available unless
implemented though, you really want a macro that says 'this compiler is
broken and will never be fixed', BOOST_NO_FUNCTION_NAME or similar. So
long as we are strict on allowing compilers into the list, I think all
interests might be served?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk