Re: [boost] [config] consexpr workaround

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] consexpr workaround
From: John Maddock (boost.regex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-13 08:10:03

>> * If the type being initialized might not be an integer type, then we
>> can use constexp or a static const declaration, but we can't use
>> BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT (because it may be implemented in terms of an 
>> enum).
>
> If you only intend to support compilers on which it is not implemented
> as an enum, it might be reasonable to use it for non-integer types
> (though one would have to take care of static initialization order...).

The point is, the only reason for BOOST_STATIC_CONSTANT existing is as a 
workaround for broken compilers that require the enum workaround, so if 
we're excluding those, there's nothing really left ;-)

John.