Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] typo on doc
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-20 12:45:50


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Maddock" <john_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2008 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [config] typo on doc

>
> vicente.botet wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> there are some typos in the table "
>>> Macros that describe C++0x features not supported
>>> "
>>>
>>> BOOST_NO_DEFAULTED_FUNCTIONS
>>> The compiler does not support defaulted (= default) functions.
>>> [[BOOST_NO_DELETED_FUNCTIONS The compiler does not support deleted
>>> (= delete) functions.
>>>
>>> BOOST_NO_UNICODE_LITERALS
>>> The compiler does not support Unicode (u8, u, U#) literals. ]]
>>> [[BOOST_NO_VARIADIC_TEMPLATES` The compiler does not support
>>> variadic templates.
>
> Now fixed in Trunk.

By the way the config files do not defines these macros at all it defines instead some macros like
# define BOOST_HAS_STATIC_ASSERT
# define BOOST_HAS_VARIADIC_TMPL
# define BOOST_HAS_RVALUE_REFS
# define BOOST_HAS_DECLTYPE

What is wrong?
 
>>> Can some macros be added to emulate the compiler behavior when
>>>
>>> BOOST_NO_DEFAULTED_FUNCTIONS
>>>
>>> BOOST_CONSTRUCTOR_DEFAULT
>>> BOOST_COPYCONSTRUCTOR_DEFAULT
>>> BOOST_NO_DELETED_FUNCTIONS
>>> BOOST_CONSTRUCTOR_DELETE
>>> BOOST_COPYCONSTRUCTOR_DELETE
>
> Sorry, don't follow what you mean there,

See my today post "N2346 - Defaulted and Deleted Functions emulation"

Vicente


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk