[boost] BOOST_MSVC versus _MSC_VER

From: Paul A Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-08 05:08:17

>-----Original Message-----
>From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
>[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Eric Niebler
>Sent: 08 August 2007 06:01
>To: boost_at_[hidden]
>Subject: Re: [boost] [time_series] Review
>
>
>> time_series_facade.hpp line 262
>>     #ifdef _MSC_VER
>> BOOST_MSVC?
>> Other places too.
>
>I don't know the policy here. I'm disabling msvc-specific warnings. Is 
>there a case when BOOST_MSVC is defined but _MSC_VER is not? 
>And in that case, can I still disable msvc-specific warnings?
>
>
>> Something somewhere is suppressing "warning C4244: 'initializing' : 
>> conversion
>> from 'double' to 'int', possible loss of data" and not 
>restoring it but 
>> I'm not
>> sure whether it's in your library yet.
>
>I'm usually pretty good about pushing and popping the warning 
>levels. If I missed one, it's a bug and I'll fix it.

Mea culpa!

I've had trouble with both of these.  Does anyone have any ideas on better ways of avoiding

1  using #ifdef BOOST_MSVC when no Boost module has yet been #included and so is not defined.  And so you don't get the effect you
wanted and need to #ifdef _MSC_VER instead.  Easy mistake to make.  Is there still a reason why we need to use BOOST_MSVC?  (rather
than always using _MSC_VER?)

2  failure to push'n'pop warning suppression?  I've spotted several mistakes - and worry about others confusing users, especially
C4244. How can we check for this automatically?

Paul

---
Paul A Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
[phone] & SMS, Mobile [phone] & SMS
pbristow_at_[hidden]