Re: [boost] Re: [constant] New version + YANL-example available

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-26 12:00:30

At 10:59 AM 1/26/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
 >Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
 >
 >> Andy Little wrote:
 >>> Tried in VC7.1:
 >>
 >> I don't have that compiler. And I use __typeof__, which I don't know
 >> whether or not the VC7.1 implements it (maybe under a different
 >> name?). As long as no one steps in and finds out what I have to change
 >> in the constant library to make it compile with the VC7.1, nothing
 >> will happen. Please try some more-or-less recent GCC or Intel
 >> compiler, this is where I developed and tested the code.
 >>
 >> Regards, Daniel
 >
 >I haven't been paying too much attention, but I sure hope we don't
 >have a [proposed] boost library which relies on the presence of
 >nonstandard language extensions (__typeof__) for its operation here.

Particularly since the C++ committee hasn't agreed on final specs for 
__typeof__, or whatever it ends up being called. The specs may change quite 
a bit before a final vote is taken. This isn't a case of some compiler 
vendors just being slow to implement something the committee has already 
blessed.

Dave's choice of the word "relies" is a key point. Lots of Boost libraries 
make use of nonstandard compiler extensions if available, but have useful 
fallbacks if the extension isn't available. Thus they don't rely on the 
extension for correct operation.

--Beman