Boost logo

Boost :

From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-30 10:13:28

On Sunday 30 November 2003 02:21 am, Eric Friedman wrote:
> My belief is that doing so would be unnecessary, and I know that it
> would result in larger variants. On the other hand, if the problem is
> *not* Borland-specific, then it would be critically important to have
> this fix.

I'ts not unheard of that Borland has a problem with
alignment_of/type_with_alignment. Both have special implementations for
Borland, including this little gem:

#ifdef __BORLANDC__
// long double gives an incorrect value of 10 (!)
// unless we do this...
struct long_double_wrapper{ long double ld; };
template<> struct alignment_of<long double>
   : public alignment_of<long_double_wrapper>{};

I guess it's fine just to use the maximally-aligned type for Borland for now
(we should revert the change _immediately_ on the main trunk once we have
branched for release), but we should not do this for other compilers.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at