Subject: Re: [boost] [Review:Contract] Andrzej's review
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-06 16:24:21
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 09/06/2012 12:27 PM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
>> Btw, would it be legal for the syntax to use a specifier like
>> __attribute__ given that technically specifiers with double
>> underscores are reserved? I'd think so because on compilers that
>> support __attribute__ it becomes like a keyword `const`, etc so I can
>> use it in the syntax.
> Using __attribute__ at all is an extension.
> In theory, the compiler could define it as
> a macro. I think it's treated as a keyword,
> but you should check to make sure.
I think it's a keyword and not defined as a macro but that can't be
guaranteed given that compilers are free to implement it as they wish.
Maybe I should use declspec and attribute (no __) for those while
verbatim will accept any __ as the compiler defines them.
I'll double check.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk