Re: [boost] Policy about non-compliant standard headers

Subject: Re: [boost] Policy about non-compliant standard headers
From: Jonathan Wakely (jwakely.boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-09-21 12:38:52

On 21 September 2013 17:27, Marc Glisse wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Sep 2013, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>
>> It's not about snprintf, it's about swprintf and vswprintf, both of which
>> are in C++98 standard.
>
>
> In namespace std if you include cwchar, and in the global namespace if you
> include wchar.h. The boost header currently includes cwchar and tries to use
> ::swprintf, that's just wrong.
>
> If that's not what the issue is about, you haven't been very clear in your
> explanations.

Indeed. A self-contained testcase that includes the right headers and
clearly demonstrates a bug would be more helpful than asserting
non-compliance.

As I said, Solaris headers are usually very strict.  That can mean
that non-portable code that works on other platforms fails to compile
on Solaris, but that's not a problem with the Solaris headers.

>> The C++ standard defines a number of headers which define C components.
>> These headers are part of the standard, and if a compiler doesn't
>> implement
>> them right, the compiler is non-compliant. I don't see the other way to
>> put
>> it.
>
> "I am misusing those headers".

:-)