Boost logo

Boost :

From: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-17 08:35:38

Gennaro Prota <gennaro_prota <at>> writes:

> The last piece of the
> puzzle, now, is choosing a migration plan. BOOST_WORKAROUND will have
> a different interface and I don't think it is feasible to replace all
> invocations in one sweep (though I haven't actually counted them) and
> even if it is the risk of destabilization is high. What about
> momentarily use BOOST_WORKAROUND_2 as name for the new macro and
> gradually do the transition? At the end, we would have just to change
> BOOST_WORKAROUND_2 to BOOST_WORKAROUND everywhere. Not that I like
> this too much but this is the only idea that I have.

or similar, do a global replace and use the now vacant
BOOST_WORKAROUND id for the new stuff? Unlike the
global replace you talk about, the one required for this
procedure is totally harmless and I'd say its associated
risk of destabilization is close to zero.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at