Re: [boost] [preprocessor] Sequences vs. All Other Data Structures

Subject: Re: [boost] [preprocessor] Sequences vs. All Other Data Structures
From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-22 15:21:35

On 22.04.2012, at 21:05, Edward Diener wrote:

> On 4/22/2012 5:45 AM, Paul Mensonides wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2012 07:51:11 +0000, Nathan Ridge wrote:
>> 
>>>>> I don't see why one compiler's lack of standards-conformance should
>>>>> prevent a useful library from becoming part of Boost.
>>>> 
>>>> Because it is not just MSVC that's the problem, and I know what the
>>>> tendency will be. This will work with compiler XYZ with *just* this
>>>> little workaround.... Any workaround whatsoever in Chaos is absolutely
>>>> unacceptable to me. It ruins the very point of the library.
>>> 
>>> The library could be proposed to Boost with the explicit understanding
>>> that it is intended to work only with fully standards-conforming
>>> preprocessors. In the long run its presence in Boost might even
>>> contribute to putting pressure on vendors of non-conformant
>>> preprocessors to get their act together.
>> 
>> I doubt the latter that would happen.  Essentially, because Chaos cannot
>> be used when targeting VC++, Boost cannot itself use it.
> 
> This is not completely true. Even though it would provide more work for a library implementor, a library could choose to use Boost Chaos for compilers that support it and choose to use Boost PP for compilers which do not ( including VC ).

What advantage would that give the library implementor over just using Boost PP?

Sebastian