Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Variadic template macros in gcc header
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-22 14:40:55
On 22 November 2010 14:33, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Is this also the intention of Boost in general, that an empty config.h means
> a compiler that supports C++03 ?
In general, an empty config.hpp means C++0x. That did seem to be the
consensus decision, and I think everyone went into it understanding
the consequences. It looks like the decision was made here (only the
first few replies are relevant):
I also found some earlier discussion where I think the change was
first proposed (only the first subthread):
Interestingly, someone proposed that the C++0x BOOST_NO_ macros should
be defined by default, and then undefined in the config headers.
Personally, I don't have a strong opinion and will follow the consensus.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk