[boost] Re: Tragically pointless?

From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-29 19:36:12

Daryle Walker wrote:

> You seem to be assuming:
> 
>     The Windows header macros are Boost-hostile
> 
> But from recent posts about the problem, I think:
> 
>     The Windows header macros are Boost-hostile _and_ STL-hostile
> 
> We can "fix" all the Boost code, but we can't change the STL files.  Since
> Boost (pretty much) requires STL, the user is screwed anyway.  This means
> that there was no point in changing our code!

You seem to be assuming that someone hasn't already fixed STL for us. 
They have.  The Dinkumware STL that ships with Visual C++ has been 
minmax-proofed in much the same way as I have just minmax-proofed Boost.

> 
> If we force the user to disable the macros, then the user can do an one-time
> change to his/her code to be Boost/STL compliant _and_ Windows compliant

Why should Boost force users to change their code?

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