Re: [boost] Re: [1.33] Program_options and Borland

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-17 06:46:26

> Yes, please!

OK, done.

>> I can't see how they would cause
>> problems with other compilers: in fact I'm not at all clear how "cmdline"
>> was ever found without the qualifier on other compilers.
>
> The 'basic_command_line_parser' class template is derived from
> detail::cmdline, and so, I believe the 'cmdline' name should be injected 
> in
> the scope of 'basic_command_line_parser'. Since all uses are inside that
> class, unqualified 'cmdline' works fine.

Understood, I never realised that was what happened to base classes, so many 
corners in this language!

>> I haven't looked at the runtime test failures with this compiler yet (has
>> anyone?),
>
> I'll try to reproduce with my version of borland later this week. But 
> IIRC,
> previously tests uses to pass for me while failing on metacomm.

I can reproduce them here, but haven't looked into them any more than that 
yet.

John.