Re: [boost] Defining compilers suggestion

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-07-14 14:09:23

From: David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> >
> > Or we could arrange to write:
> >
> >      #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(BOOST_GCC,< 3,2,3)
> 
> Nobody likes that one?

I like it.  I just didn't think I needed to say so!

> What about:
> 
>       #if BOOST_WORKAROUND(GCC,< 3,2,3)
> 
> Pretty succinct, I think.

Since BOOST_WORKAROUND can put the "BOOST_" prefix on it to keep
it safe (that is, to refer to BOOST_GCC and not to GCC), the
succinctness is a real help.

> 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.

I like the looks of what Jonathan proposed.  But these look fine,
too.

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;