From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-15 05:23:10
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Well others will want to comment on their expectations. The tipping
> point for me in the direction I suggest is that I found many instances
> in current Boost code where there was only reference to _MSC_VER, with
> the expectation that it would apply in both real and simulated modes.
> SO it's not translating the use of BOOST_MSVC that worries me, it's
> the translation of all the _MSC_VER uses. Should they be converted to
> BOOST_CXX_EMUALTED_MSVC or to BOOST_CXX_MSVC?
Aren't 99.9999% of those just checks around #pragma once ?
What benefit does BOOST_CXX_EMUALTED_MSVC provide over _MSV_VER anyway given
that the two will always be identical?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk