From: Piyo (cybermax_69_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-16 13:27:36
Marcus Lindblom wrote:
> Xerces is pretty large, it has a lot of classes, etc. However, it's
> completely void of templates, if that would matter.
> The techinique appears very non-intrusive for users of a single version
> (except for forward declarations).
> I'm sure one can come up with a recommeded scheme that would simplify
> things (i.e. for the author FooLib to define FOOLIB_BOOST_VERSION and
> use that).
> However, there are a few places in boost that export "global" variables,
> such as the placeholders (IIRC they go in the anonymous namespace).
> It could add some additional testing burden. (Worst case: Test to
> include every boost file with every other boost file, both of every
> version supporting this scheme.)
> But I'm sure there are others who are more familiar with this technique
> and it's potential pitfalls.
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
I am open to any form of solution whether it be macro-based or bcp or
Xerces style. I just find it sad that I am stopping 1.34 from entering
our company on purpose because I do not think that adding to our
existing 1.32 and 1.33.1 installations will help. Is there anyway we can
get the core boost developers to look into this? Since I am the only
boost-evangelist here, I can't imagine me stopping progress over
something like this.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk