Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] defining __has_extension in suffix.hpp?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-22 10:46:26

Next message: Mathias Gaunard: "Re: [boost] Debugging optimisation unstable code - Stack and other tools"
Previous message: Jason Roehm: "Re: [boost] transforming ex. boost lib into C++11-only lib?"
In reply to: Rob Stewart: "Re: [boost] [config] defining __has_extension in suffix.hpp?"
Next in thread: Niall Douglas: "Re: [boost] [config] defining __has_extension in suffix.hpp?"

Rob Stewart wrote:
> On January 22, 2015 3:56:12 AM EST, John Maddock <boost.regex_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> > However, aren't those reserved symbols? If we're being pedantic....
>
> I was going to point out the same. What about BOOST_HAS_FEATURE and
> BOOST_HAS_EXTENSION?

Works for me.

Next message: Mathias Gaunard: "Re: [boost] Debugging optimisation unstable code - Stack and other tools"
Previous message: Jason Roehm: "Re: [boost] transforming ex. boost lib into C++11-only lib?"
In reply to: Rob Stewart: "Re: [boost] [config] defining __has_extension in suffix.hpp?"
Next in thread: Niall Douglas: "Re: [boost] [config] defining __has_extension in suffix.hpp?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk