Re: [boost] [optional] New RC_1_34_0 regression

From: Richard Smith (richard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-03 13:40:33

Steven Watanabe wrote:

> Richard Smith <richard <at> ex-parrot.com> writes:
>
> > I've just found what I believe to be a new regression on the
> > boost RC_1_34_0 branch relative to the 1.33.1 release.  The
> > example below is a simplified extract of some real world
> > where the behaviour of boost::none silently changes.
>
> Doesn't internal linkage in headers have the same
> problem as unnamed namespaces?  Is there some reason
> we can't use

[...]

This works for me:

  namespace boost {
    namespace detail { struct none_helper {}; }
    typedef int (*none_t)(detail::none_helper);
    inline int none(detail::none_helper) { return 0; }
  }

(Which is your version with the obvious typos and warnings
corrected.)  That removes the regression I was describing.

But I don't have ready access to one of the compilers
(Borland or VC7.1 ?) that exhibits problems with precompiled
headers.

Richard Smith