From: Bronek Kozicki (brok_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-02 12:24:43
Bronek Kozicki <brok_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> If we want to go that way, we're going to need standard prefix and
>> postfix headers that we #include in every Boost header:
>> Otherwise it will be totally unmaintainable.
> Hm, as this is actually workaround, why not apply it only locally?
After second thought, you are right. We (eg. me & my colleagues working
on single large codebase that has nothing to do with boost except using
it here and there) do apply such workarounds directly in the place of
warning in our codebase, but we also have "advantage" of using only
single compiler family (two versions of Visual C++).
Maintenance of such local worarounds in boost is going to be nightmare,
therefore "prefix headers" and "postfix headers" are much more sensible
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk