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?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk