Subject: Re: [boost] Moving workaround headers to [config]
From: Glen Fernandes (glen.fernandes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-31 17:05:29
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
>> You should really look at _MSC_VER instead of _CPPLIB_VER which is
>> undocumented and unsupported. (The story is that _CPPLIB_VER is a Dinkumware
>> macro, and Microsoft doesn't promise that we'll always keep it, or remember
>> to update it for each major version. _MSC_VER is the compiler major version
>> macro, which for customers outside Microsoft always corresponds 1:1 to the
>> STL implementation.)
> I'm not sure that this is true when using the Intel compiler.
Plus other Windows C++ implementations that use Dinkumware for the
standard library (e.g. Embarcadero's C++Builder).
Also, this wouldn't be sufficient for other C++ implementations that
define _MSC_VER but do not use Dinkumware at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk