Boost logo

Boost :

From: Joaquin M Lopez Munoz (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-10-10 06:57:26

Stephen Kelly <steveire <at>> writes:

> On 10/10/2013 07:48 AM, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz wrote:
> > Stephen Kelly <steveire <at>> writes:
> >
> >> On 10/09/2013 12:39 AM, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz wrote:
> >>> I understand there's been some discussion about dropping support for
> >>> compliers with BOOST_NO_TEMPLATE_PARTIAL_SPECIALIZATION defined. Has some
> >>> final decision been made about this?
> >> What is the question behind the question?
> > Once the decision is taken, I can get rid of some workarounds in the Boost
> > libs I maintain.
> Indeed. I already have patches ready to push which remove the use of the
> macro throughout boost.

In my case, it's not so much about removing #ifdefs as about
eliminating workarounds like this:

Instead of

template<typename T> foo<T,type1>{...};
template<typename T> foo<T,type2>{...};

I'm forced to write

template<typename T> foo_type1{...};
template<typename T> foo_type2{...};

template<typename T,typename Q>
struct foo:

These workarounds cannot be eliminated by simple grepping/deleting.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica Digital

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at