Re: [boost] [result_of] Allow result_of to work with C++11 lambdas

Subject: Re: [boost] [result_of] Allow result_of to work with C++11 lambdas
From: Nathan Crookston (nathan.crookston_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-04-10 14:57:34

Hi Vicente,

Vicente J. Botet Escriba wrote:

> Le 10/04/13 19:39, Nathan Crookston a écrit :
> I think it would be uncommon for the user to define those macros.  Here's a
>
>> situation where it may be useful:
>>
>> I have a library which I claim supports VC9 and Clang.  I do my
>> development
>> with clang 3.2, and rely on some form of automated testing to verify it
>> works with MSVC.  I may commonly forget to add result_type or a nested
>> struct to my functors, since clang uses decltype.  After the Nth time, I
>> may, during my own development, #define BOOST_RESULT_OF_USE_TR1, just so
>> that I'm not continually breaking the VC9 build.
>>
>> So again, I think it's uncommon.
>>
> Do you mean that if a library author develops and tests with both
> compilers an even more at once he would need to define
> BOOST_RESULT_OF_USE_TR1 from the beginning even if defining
> BOOST_RESULT_OF_USE_DECTYPE works better on some compilers? But the library
> author cannot know how the users would define their Functors so it can not
> define these macros.
>

No, I don't mean that.  I mean the library author may choose to do that
during development, just to avoid writing code that can't be used with a
less capable compiler.  In my mind, it's like enabling certain warnings on
MSVC so that my code is more likely portable to g++ later.

I think most people should (and will) leave the macros alone, so the best
variant is detected for their platform.

Nate