Re: [boost] Boost for new compiler

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-16 14:50:20

Peter Dimov wrote:
> Beman Dawes:
> 
>> Where RTTI is useful, but not essential, I'd personally rather not
>> remove it entirely. Instead, the code could respond to a macro
>> (BOOST_NO_RTTI perhaps) and avoid usage when present.
> 
> In non-essential scenarios, often the proper macro to test is 
> BOOST_NO_TYPEID:
> 
> http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/1104
> 
> since typeid(T) does not require the R in RTTI and may be supported even 
> when RTTI is off (under MSVC for example).

Good point.

--Beman