Subject: Re: [boost] [Config] Meaning of BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_INITIALIZER_LIST
From: Marshall Clow (mclow.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-08 10:48:05
On Mar 8, 2012, at 2:15 AM, John Maddock wrote:
>> Now there's a hoot.
>> I just finished searching for BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED to see if anyone in boost was using it - with the same idea.
>> In all the cases that I've looked at, if BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED is set, so are BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_UNORDERED_MAP and BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_UNORDERED_SET
>> However, there are cases where BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED is _not_ set, and the other ones are.
>> [ I think those might be bugs. ]
>> We could just say that BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_UNORDERED_SET is a synonym for BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED, and is the preferred replacement.
> Agreed we should deprecate BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED - but I would set it if *either* of BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_UNORDERED_SET or BOOST_NO_CXX11_HDR_UNORDERED_MAP is set (since it implies both).
There's some serious weirdnesses in the logic of defining BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED; can you take a look at the STLPort configuration and let me know what you think should be done there?
Also, is there/should there be a relationship between BOOST_NO_STD_UNORDERED and BOOST_HAS_TR1_HDR_UNORDERED_MAP/SET?
Marshall Clow Idio Software <mailto:mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>
A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait).
-- Yu Suzuki
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk