From: Anteru (newsgroups_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-01 04:36:04
James Talbut schrieb:
> That's a useful idea, but doesn't alter the fact that date_time 1.35 has
> broken previously working code and should be altered to work
> harmoniously with other boost libraries.
> The windows include order dependencies are a nightmare and I think it's
> the responsibility of libs that force their inclusion to avoid making
> the situation worse than it is.
> In other words, if there are include order dependencies in boost it's a
> bug, IMO.
IMO, too, and I've openend a ticket for it:
Not only because it breaks winsock.h, but I have an enum member ERROR
and it's useless after including date_time :/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk