Re: [boost] [config] Macro proposal

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-15 13:04:43

Rene Rivera <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 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?

Either they should be left alone (how many are checking the version
number?) or they should be converted to the former.  The latter should
be reserved for the real thing.  Otherwise, what would we turn
BOOST_MSVC into?  BOOST_CXX_REAL_MSVC?  That seems a bit perverse.

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