Subject: Re: [boost] the 'not' keyword
From: Rob Riggs (rob_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-02 23:46:51
On 10/02/2011 03:33 PM, Darren Garvey wrote:
> MSVC requires you #include<ciso646> to get the keyword alternatives,
> although I've no idea why (since I've recently started to like them).
I, too, have started to like the operator keywords -- at least for the
logical operators (this bitwise operators not so much). I strive for a
literate programming style and have become used to having these in other
languages. They help bring the logical structure of an expression into
focus, especially when combining both bitwise and logical operators in a
> One thing I'm a little curious about is whether the keywords are allowed in
> Boost libraries.
Part of Boost's legacy is in pushing compiler vendors towards more
rigorous standards compliance. At a minimum I would hope the Boost
community would be neutral towards their use.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk