Re: [boost] [spirit] Where is SPIRIT_VERSION?

Subject: Re: [boost] [spirit] Where is SPIRIT_VERSION?
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-12 18:21:53

Robert Ramey wrote:

>> Tell me if you still think we need one.
> 
> Here is my problem:
> 
> I included headers from spirit in order to parse xml created
> by the serialization system.  I've been very pleased by the
> fact that once it was done, I've (almost) never had to back
> to it.  This is just as well as I've by now forgotten everything
> about it.  (increasing stack overflow as a function of aging
> brain).   When major change where made in implementation,
> spirit 1.6 was left available for older compilers.  This worked
> well.  Users of Borland compilers only had to include
> the directory for spriit 1.6 headers and everything worked fine.
> Other compilers could use the recent implemenation without
> problems.
> 
> The latest version of spirit redirects the headers.  This fails
> on some compilers (I think pgi is one of them).  So I figured
> no problem, I'll just tweak the #include avoid the redirection.
> Now even with spirt1.6x headers in the include path, the
> borland compilers fail.
> 
> Using boost version is not a solution since some compilers
> require 1.6x even though they are using the latest version of
> boost.  What I was looking for was a way to determine
> which version of spirt was being used to permit inclusion
> of the proper headers.
> 
>>From my perspective - we're on spirit version 3 now.
> Unfortunately this is hidden from view.  This makes thinks
> look "cleaner" but in fact hides differences which are relevant.
> 
> So I would like to see
> 
> boost/spirit/... files and boost::spirit::... namespace mapped to 1.6
> boost/spirit2/... files and boost::spirit::... namespace mapped to 1.8
> boost/spirit3/... files and boost::spirit::... namespace mapped to ?
> 
> This would mean that old code would continue to compile.  Of
> course, boost wouldn't have to keep around the old versions
> or maintain testing on them.  They could be archived separately.
> But we wouldn't have the issue of "which spirit are you using"
> or I got code which uses spirit and I get a raft of compile
> errors", etc.

Alright, I think you got me convinced that we should keep
the original boost/spirit/version.hpp file as-is. Hartmut,
what do you think?

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://spirit.sf.net