Re: [boost] Re: true64cxx and toupper

From: Jonathan Wakely (cow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-11 07:14:56

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 12:43:37PM +0200, Markus Sch?pflin wrote:

> The toolset was modified on my behalf. Below is an excert of the mail I 
> sent to justify the changes.
[snip]
> >- The use of "-std strict_ansi -nopure_cname" was causing all kinds of 
> >troubles for me. I replaced that with "-D__USE_STD_IOSTREAM -nousing_std"  
> >which seems to work far better.

This seems a bit hasty IMHO. Surely it would be better to make Boost work
with the compiler in strict_ansi mode than just force the compiler to act
in a non-standard way?

I'd have thought that simply "-std strict_ansi" would be ok, as Boost
has plenty of its own mechanisms for working around any remaining quirks
of the compiler, without resorting to the compiler's own large array of
compatibility switches.

Do the config settings for that compiler match the new switches used, or
are they still the settings determined when "-std strict_ansi
-nopure_cname" was used?

jon

--
"Everybody understands Mickey Mouse. Few understand Herman Hesse.
 Only a handful understood Albert Einstein. And nobody understood
 Emperor Norton."
	- Slogan of NORTON CABAL - S.F.