Re: [boost] [MPL lite or MPL 2] A modest proposal

Subject: Re: [boost] [MPL lite or MPL 2] A modest proposal
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-03-05 13:57:46

AMDG

On 03/05/2015 11:43 AM, Bruno Dutra wrote:
> 
> I do understand dropping support to ancient defective compilers, but
> why should it also deny support to older language standards on
> compilers that do comply with them? No doubt it should benefit from
> post C++11 features, notably variadic templates, but I don't see why
> it shouldn't emulate variadics on C++98/03 setups, just like it
> already does today. Please note the difference between old deffective
> implementations from valid implementations of older standards.
> 

I think you underestimate just how painful
it is to emulate variadics in C++03.

In Christ,
Steven Watanabe