From: Michael Glassford (glassfordm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-23 07:52:00
Miro Jurisic wrote:
> In article <uekrke8bn.fsf_at_[hidden]>,
> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>I see no reason to use names longer than those suggested below.
>>> BOOST_GNU (1)
>>> BOOST_MSVC (2)
> I would suggest using BOOST_CC_* or BOOST_COMPILER_*, to avoid possible
> ambiguities. For instance, BOOST_INTEL in and of itself does not make it clear
> whether it denotes a compiler-specific kludge or an architecture-specific kludge.
I second this. In addition to being more consistent and eliminating
possible ambiguities, it would also make it much easier to search for
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk