Re: [boost] Defining compilers suggestion

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-14 11:16:50

David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>>> 
>>> The ability to accommodate these unlikely scenarios has to be balanced against
>>> usability. If a test for GCC with major version < 3 has to use "3000000,"
>>> chances are good that a test will be misspelled and a needed workaround will not
>>> be applied.
>>> 
>>
>> It is possible to put an expression to calculate the 3000000 in this case into a 
>> macro:
>>
>>      #define BOOST_VERSION(major,minor,patchlvl) \
>>         (major * 1000000 + minor * 1000 + patchlvl)
>>
>>      #define BOOST_GCC \
>>         BOOST_GCC_VERSION(__GNUC__,__GNUC_MINOR__,__GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__)
>>
>> Example:
>>
>>      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_GCC,< BOOST_VERSION(3,2,3))
>>      // ...
>>      #endif
>
> Or we could arrange to write:
>
>      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_GCC,< 3,2,3)

Nobody likes that one?

What about:

      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(GCC,< 3,2,3)

Pretty succinct, I think.

I'm not sure about getting BOOST_TESTED_AT to work here.  

      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(GCC, BOOST_TESTED_AT 3,2,3)

would be nice syntax, but I'm just not sure how workable it is.  We
may end up with

      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND_TESTED_AT(GCC, 3,2,3)

which is actually pretty nice and requires fewer fancy tricks to
implement.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com