Re: [boost] [config] vc10 and BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] vc10 and BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-19 20:40:29

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 4/19/2010 5:45 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Eric Niebler <eric_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>> The issue is whether the decltype keyword is too broken on VC10 to define
>>> BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE. I think it /may/ be, so we should define it just to be
>>> safe, at least for 1.43.
>>
>> Eric, where do we stand on this? Does the VC10 decltype problem in the
>> beta still exist in the final release of VC10?
>
> The bug is not in VC10 per se, but in the specification of decltype. An
> issue has been raised with the standardization committee and proposed
> wording has been suggested. Hopefully, it'll make it into C++0x Final.
>
> What that means for Boost.Config is unclear to me. We may decide to
> define a defect macro for this particular buggy decltype behavior, since
> gcc's decltytpe works this way, too.

That sounds like a reasonable approach. Care to propose a name? What
is the CWG issue number?

--Beman