Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost c++ language conformance
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-18 18:40:38

on Thu Sep 18 2008, Gennaro Prota <> wrote:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> on Mon Sep 15 2008, Gennaro Prota <> wrote:
>>> Comeau, on whatever platform. In an ideal world, that should extend to any
>>> compiler having the EDG front-end, except that, in the world we have, many
>>> vendors (see e.g. Intel) manage to screw it up in the most creative ways
>>> (perhaps they shouldn't be given access to the front-end source code :-))
>> Most of those "screw-ups" are actually implemented by EDG for Intel and
>> other vendors, because Intel's customers demand compatibility with
>> other, more popular "screwed-up" implementations such as VC++ and GCC.
> I don't think so. Unless someone from EDG tells me that,

They've told me so. Do you think I'd make it up?

> for instance, the non-conformities you can see at
> <>
> for Sandia-darwin-intel's, Sandia-intel 9.1, pgi-7.2 (not recognizing a simple
> constant expression as such) were implemented by them.

Frankly, I don't know about those, but it's irrelevant to my point. I
didn't say _all_ the screw ups were intentionally implemented by EDG.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at