|
Boost :
|
- Next message: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Previous message: Tim Blechmann: "Re: [boost] [lockfree review] rfc: naming and interface"
- In reply to: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Next in thread: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Reply: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
On 07/22/2011 04:13 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> Right, instead you have to write BOOST_CHAR16_T, which is defined as
> boost::char16_t or char16_t depending on availability of C++0x or
> Microsoft char16_t. Ugly. Ugly. Ugly.
Or, as I said, you use boost::char16, which is a typedef to char16_t if
available.
No macro, no ugliness, portable and safe.
- Next message: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Previous message: Tim Blechmann: "Re: [boost] [lockfree review] rfc: naming and interface"
- In reply to: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Next in thread: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
- Reply: Beman Dawes: "Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulate C++0x char16_t, char32_t, std::u16string, and std::u32string"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk