Re: [boost] is_enum andis_convertibleinterdependencies....BOOST_NO_IS_ABSTRACT

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-23 11:01:20

> Didn't we decide that flags for conformance should always be in the
> form of
>
>     BOOST_NO_some-conforming-c++-feature
>
> so that unless something special is done, the assumption will be that
> the compiler conforms?

Absolutely: however BOOST_TT_HAS_CONFORMING_IS_CLASS_IMPLEMENTATION was one 
of yours I believe: chuckles, ducks, runs for cover....

John.