Subject: Re: [boost] [1.53.0] Beta release candidates 2 now available for testing
From: Marshall Clow (mclow.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-05 23:28:28
On Jan 5, 2013, at 4:05 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Le 06/01/13 00:06, Marshall Clow a écrit :
>> On Jan 5, 2013, at 2:45 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> Shouldn't BOOST_NO_CXX11_NUMERIC_LIMITS be defined as it doesn't provides a C++11 implementation, or should Boost.Chrono take in account the missing feature of libc++ individually?
>> I'm not sure what you are referring to with the word "it" in that sentence.
> I meant if Boost.Config shouldn't not define BOOST_NO_CXX11_NUMERIC_LIMITS when using the libc++ as doesn't provide a compliant c++11 implementation.
I think that's an over-reaction.
It's a bug.
I'm not even sure that we should do anything about it; other than to note it and move on.
Clang 3.2 is at RC3 stage, so I'm pretty sure that this will be fixed before we ship Boost 1.53.0
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