Boost logo

Boost :

From: Matthew Herrmann (matthew.herrmann_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-19 18:16:56

> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:34:14 +0300
> From: ???? ????????? <olegabr_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [boost] [asio] header order dependence with <windows.h>
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Message-ID: <E1Gwir0-0003QL-00.olegabr-mail-ru_at_[hidden]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
> Sebastian Redl wrote:
>>> >> It means that while the issue under discussion is not resolved - asio can not be targeted as a proposal for inclusion into the std. and it leads to the conclusion that it doesn't conform to boost goals. sad...
>>> >>
>> > I disagree. The header order dependency is not something inherent to the
>> > ASIO library. If ASIO were to become a standard, then this
>> > platform-specific issue would be for the compiler vendor to resolve. For
>> > example, MS might have to break back compatibility by not getting the
>> > <winsock.h> stuff by default in <windows.h> unless a compiler switch is
>> > enabled.

I'm not sure about this. If the library is required to be header-only by
design, then it imposes constraints on the implementation, such as
vulnerability to header order dependencies. Either asio will need to be
insulated against ordering in system headers, or the system headers on
all target platforms will need to provide stronger guarantees on being
free of such dependencies. A question of immovable objects and
irresistible forces.

Best Regards,
Matthew Herrmann

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