Re: [boost] Boost and (Microsoft's) _SECURE_SCL

Subject: Re: [boost] Boost and (Microsoft's) _SECURE_SCL
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-03 14:01:22

> Long story short of this post: Are there any plans (left) to add 
> additional name mangling to the boost libs on Windows to address the 
> problem of mismatched _SECURE_SCL setting?

Long story short: I'm happy to add this to the auto-linking header if we all 
agree on a mangling scheme  - how about "idl#" where # is the IDL level?

However, there really isn't much point in this unless we also add this to 
Boost.Build: since it seems that now that this has been rationalized in VC10 
I guess "idl=0/1/2" would work well?  Unless it's possible to have HID=1 
SCL=0 as an option in any VC versions?

John.