From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-05 13:17:57
Gennaro Prota <gennaro_prota_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 20:24:34 -0500, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
>>To be consistent and to prevent being blindsided in the future by other
>>compilers deciding to spoof one another's macros, perhaps we should define
>>BOOST_x, where x is the compiler name, for every compiler we have a config
>>for. And then pointing out the problem in our lib guide for developers.
> It's incredible, however, how proposals are appreciated in proportion
> to the author's authoritativeness. No polemic intent but I've proposed
> this 18 months ago (for libraries) and nobody agreed (please, don't
> tell me that for libraries "it is a different thing" :)).
> PS: I'm not angry, really, just noticing.
I didn't notice a great chorus of assent to Beman's suggestion, nor to
mine when I proposed the same thing. AFAIK nothing has been done
about it to date. I'm not sure what you're noticing.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk