Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-users] [boost.build] should we not define _SECURE_SCL=0 by default for all msvc toolsets
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-19 03:38:45
on Fri Dec 05 2008, Thorsten Ottosen <thorsten.ottosen-AT-dezide.com> wrote:
> John Maddock skrev:
>> Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>>>>> I think it would be ok to allow both options, but probably the
>>>>> default should equal the Microsoft default with an easy way to
>>>>> opt-out of the madness!
>> Agree 100%, our default should equal the compiler default, otherwise it'll catch too
>> many folks out.
>>>> But AFAIK, even the prebuilt binaries that you get from Boost
>>>> Consulting are built with _SECURE_SCL=0.
>> Really ??? I hadn't realised that, that's not good IMO, given that the define
>> changes the ABI away from the compilers default.
> Dave, since its your company that prevides the binary, can you comment on this?
Our binaries are built the standard way that bjam makes them. We don't
do anything special to add _SECURE_SCL=0.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk