Re: [boost] What to do with platform defining 'null' as preprocessor symbol?

Subject: Re: [boost] What to do with platform defining 'null' as preprocessor symbol?
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-08-23 19:09:35

On 8/24/12 1:58 AM, Eric Niebler wrote:
> On 8/23/2012 1:42 PM, Jeff Flinn wrote:
>> Might it not be better to provide some platform specific config file(s)
>> that undef offending macro names. In the case of nil in fusion, I'd hate
>> to see a loss in clarity because of some bad platform practice. I've
>> been able to address these issues by #undef'ing in just a few places.
>
> Bad idea, IMO. Boost shouldn't be messing with things defined in 3rd
> party headers, especially platform headers. #including a boost header
> shouldn't change the meaning of existing code, or make valid platform
> code invalid. The same reason went into the Boost min/max guidelines and
> Herculean effort to bring our codebase into compliance with them.

It's been a long standing issue that I can't seem to find a resolution
for: Fusion's use of nil. What can we do about it? Nothing? Do we
just let the user deal with it themselves (e.g. by #undef'ing).
I am somehow being compelled to succumb to the pressure. Mac folks
have been pleading for years now to rename struct nil to something
else. Unfortunately, it's part of the API: http://tinyurl.com/c3k7fgw

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://boost-spirit.com