[boost] Using boost with bccx 6.00 (Borland's new compiler)

From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-09 08:04:50

I have been playing about briefly attempting to use some of boost-1.30.2 
with Borlands' new compiler bccx 6.00 (__BORLANDC__ == 0x600).  As some 
may know, this is an EDG based compiler (I think EDG 3.01) using 
DinkumWare for the STL (and possibly the RTL too).

I have attached a new borland.hpp config header.  Basically the only 
workaround I've needed so far has been BOOST_NO_VOID_RETURNS otherwise 
function fails to work with void.  This header would probably be best 
re-structured by someone as I've basically #def'd out all the current 
work-arounds and added just the new one at the bottom.

The other places I've found work-arounds need is because code only 
checks against __BORLANDC__ so workarounds are being introduced which 
aren't necessary for the new compiler.  I haven't done this by find and 
replace, more by when errors have shown.  I have changed code such as

#if defined(__BORLANDC__)

to

#if defined(__BORLANDC__) && (__BORLANDC__ < 0x600).  This places I have 
done this are:

type_traits/is_const.hpp line 39
type_traits/is_pointer.hpp line 72 (added before && !defined(__COMO__)
type_traits/is_reference.hpp line 36
type_traits/is_volatile.hpp line 36
type_traits/remove_reference.hpp line 26

I have also had to change config/stdlib/dinkumware.hpp line 28 from

#  if defined(_MSC_VER) && (_MSC_VER < 1300)

to

#  if defined(_MSC_VER) && (_MSC_VER < 1300) && !defined(__BORLANDC__)

as the new compiler defines _MSC_VER (as 1200) but the work-arounds 
aren't needed for the new compiler.

I have only done some simple tests with shared_ptr, function (now works 
with preferred syntax where as bcc32 5.6.4 only worked with portable 
syntax) and some simple lambda expressions.  I'm not sure on how to run 
regression tests so this is all I've managed so far.

I'm really wondering who is able to tell whether these changes are good 
and if anyone is actually trying to get bccx working with boost at the 
moment (I know it has been mentioned briefly before).

Thanks

Russell

PS: I'm unsure as to why the BOOST_NO_VOID_RETURNS is needed for this 
compiler as the common_edg.hpp seems to indicate that this is only 
necessary for EDG versions <= 240, and Borland's is 301.  Maybe I need 
to define something else somewhere.