Re: [boost] [config] vc10 and BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] vc10 and BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-20 13:31:14

>>> 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?
>
> decltype is still broken in the final release of VC10. e.g. the
> following code deduces the return type of getOne() to be one& rather
> than one, causing an error on the "res r" line. Bizarrely, this problem
> goes away if NO_CONSTRUCTOR is defined, as the return type is deduced
> correctly.

For the present I've added that to the BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE test case in SVN 
Trunk.  Also defined BOOST_NO_DECLTYPE in trunk for VC10, but please do 
change this if there is consensus that it works "well enough".

I've also stopped defining the following macros for VC10 as per ticket 
https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4110:

BOOST_NO_CHAR16_T
BOOST_NO_CHAR32_T
BOOST_NO_INITIALIZER_LISTS
BOOST_NO_NULLPTR

If anyone thinks these should still be defined, please provide updated test 
cases.

Cheers, John.