Re: [boost] [RFC] Boost library name mangling and Microsoft's 'secure STL' feature.

Subject: Re: [boost] [RFC] Boost library name mangling and Microsoft's 'secure STL' feature.
From: Michael Marcin (mike.marcin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-03 17:35:43

Jurko Gospodnetiæ wrote:
> 
>   There have been requests to make Boost Build cleanly support 
> Microsoft's 'secure STL'/'checked iterators' feature.
> 
>   Here's is one suggested implementation and how that will affect 
> building Boost libraries on Windows:
> 
>   We add a new <msvc-checked-iterators> Boost Build feature with values 
> 'off' and 'on' and 'off' being the default.
> 

It sounds OK to me except 2 issues.

Are there other toolsets with checked iterator options?  I thought gcc 
and stlport had them. Perhaps the feature should be <checked-iterators>.

The default value should obey The Principle of Least Astonishment. IMO 
this means it should be equivalent to the toolset defaults.

Thanks,

Michael Marcin