From: Bronek Kozicki (brok_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-31 13:37:02
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:54:32 +0100, Drazen DOTLIC wrote:
> You are missing the point IMHO. Probably everyone *wants* to have it on,
> for exactly the reasons you mention above. But, not all of us have the
> luxury to do so, because we use other libraries besides boost, and
> compile our programs as a whole (using same set of flags).
I think that small citation from MSVC71 (ie. "1310") Help could be
>>>> citation begin
If /Zc:wchar_t is not specified, the compiler requires you to either
define wchar_t or to include one of the many header files that defines
it (for example, wchar.h). Typically, wchar_t is defined as an unsigned
When the /Zc:wchar_t compiler option is specified, the type wchar_t
becomes a native type that maps to __wchar_t in the same way that short
maps to __int16.
With /Zc:wchar_t, the compiler recognizes wchar_t as a native type. See
Data Type Ranges for more information about wchar_t.
__wchar_t is always available.
By providing overloads for both the unsigned short and __wchar_t
variations of wchar_t, you can create libraries that can easily be
linked with code compiled with or without /Zc:wchar_t and avoid the need
to provide two different builds of the library (one with and one without
When /Zc:wchar_t is specified, _WCHAR_T_DEFINED and
_NATIVE_WCHAR_T_DEFINED symbols are defined; see Predefined Macros for
>>>> citation end
(the same apply to MSVC7 ie. "1300")
Honestly, I'm do not think this could change the way boost sources are
being be compiled on MSVC71, but probably it can help to consume them.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk