Re: [boost] Re: Re: additional test for is_abstract type trait

From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-29 18:16:15

Hi Pavel

----- Mensaje original -----
De: Pavel Vozenilek <pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Lunes, Noviembre 29, 2004 11:39 pm
Asunto: [boost] Re: Re: additional test for is_abstract type trait

> 
> "Joaquín Mª López Muñoz" wrote:
> 
> > John, now that you're at is_abstract, I wonder whether you could
> > consider adding some workaround in is_abstract.hpp making
> > boost::is_abstract return unconditionally false for those compilers
> > known not to work for it.
> > You can read about the origin of this request at:
> >
> > http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/boost/2209389
> >
> Wouldn't it be better to have macro like
> BOOST_NO_XYZ defined for failing compilers instead?
> 

Oh, yes, this is probably more sensible. No matter
the final implementation, though, what we need is some 
direct support from is_abstract.hpp to help the
programmer avoid the crashing compilers. Otherwise,
the guarding macros, i.e. the actual knowledge about
what compilers do support boost::is_abstract, will be
duplicated and scattered across the Boost/user source
code.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo