Re: [boost] The Lonely Song of the MPL Maintainer -- or Boost support for antediluvian compiler and the future supprot of C++11

Subject: Re: [boost] The Lonely Song of the MPL Maintainer -- or Boost support for antediluvian compiler and the future supprot of C++11
From: Vicente Botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-15 12:37:54

John Maddock-3 wrote:
> 
>>>> I have a question, is SFINAE_EXPR a C++0x or C++03 feature?
>>>
>>> It's possible to have it in C++03, but it's not required before C++0x.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification. I was not aware of this detail. In this
>> case
>> you are right the list of c++03 compliant compilers should be larger.
>>
>> John, could this feature have two corresponding macros, one optional 
>> feature
>> BOST_HAS_SFINAE_EXPR for c++03 and one defect BOST_NO_SFINAE_EXPR for 
>> c++11?
> 
> At present we already have BOOST_NO_SFINAE_EXPR, adding a second macro
> just 
> adds unnecessary redundancy IMO.  Besides we've sort of already set the 
> president that missing C++11 features have BOOST_NO_ macros and not 
> BOOST_HAS_.
> 
> 

The idea was to make evident that SFINAE_EXPR is an optional feature of
C++03 and not a defect. However is a mandatory feature of c++11. This macro
is on the section associated to defects to the c++03 standard, and should be
on the section associated to the c++11 defects, isn't it? 

Best,
Vicente

--
View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/The-Lonely-Song-of-the-MPL-Maintainer-or-Boost-support-for-antediluvian-compiler-and-the-future-supp1-tp3741628p3745048.html
Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.