Re: [boost] [filesystem] Compatibility with STLPort

Subject: Re: [boost] [filesystem] Compatibility with STLPort
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-03 11:53:48

Andrey Semashev wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Andrey Semashev 
>> <andrey.semashev_at_[hidden]
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've created ticket #3241 some time ago, with a patch attached. It's 
>>> about
>>> Boost.Filesystem compatibility with STLPort expression templates 
>>> feature.
>>>
>>> So far no activity has appeared on it, although the fix is trivial. 
>>> Is it
>>> OK if I go ahead and commit the patch?
>>>
>>> PS: Ticket URL is https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/3241
>>
>>
>> Unless I'm missing something, the code being replaced would be perfectly
>> valid with a conforming implementation of the standard library, and only
>> causes a problem because STLPort isn't conforming. Thus I'd rather use an
>> #ifdef so that the replacement only applies to STLPort.
> 
> But the new code is also conforming. Is it worth to put an #ifdef when 
> the new code alone works everywhere?
> 
>> Is this something STLPort intends to fix, by the way?
> 
> I didn't ask, as I don't think this can be fixed in STLPort. Unless, by 
> disabling the template expressions altogether, that is, which is already 
> possible. But it would be a pity to lose this optimization because of 
> one or two places of incompatibility that are so easy to fix.

Ping?