[boost] Re: win32.hpp and min/max macros

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-12-29 18:27:22

Darin Adler wrote:
> On Dec 29, 2003, at 1:50 PM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> 
>> It seems extremely unwise to be undef'ing min and max.  Evil though 
>> they are, many Win32 platform headers (and users' headers!) depend on 
>> them, and there is simply no way to write a template or set of 
>> overloads that behave exactly as the macros do.
> 
> 
> Microsoft suggests defining NOMINMAX: 
> <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;143208>.
> 
> How does <afxtempl.h> cope with clients that have set NOMINMAX?
> 

If you define NOMINMAX and include afxtempl.h, it will fail to compile 
because it will be unable to find identifier 'max'. It's probably worth 
filing a bug against Microsoft for that, but the problem remains and 
Boost should cope.

I should point out that win32.hpp both undef's min/max *and* defines 
NOMINMAX. It should be users who decide to define NOMINMAX, not boost. 
Boost should work regardless of whether the min/max macros are defined 
or not. They are quite possibly the most used macros on the most used 
platform. Boost shouldn't be fooling with them.

-- 
Eric Niebler
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com