![]() |
Boost : |
Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Using SD-6 macros
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-06-13 11:51:36
On 13 Jun 2015 at 11:27, Edward Diener wrote:
> > For each feature test, we would need both (e.g.) __cpp_constexpr and
> > __cpp_constexpr_and_implemented_correctly. The chance of just (e.g.)
> > __cpp_constexpr being reliable enough is low, IMO, particularly for
> > non-trivial feature use (e.g. Boost).
>
> What you are saying is that we can use SD-6 but that we shouldn't trust
> that whoever implements it is doing it correctly.
Both GCC and clang have been lenient in letting you use some minor
C++ 14 constexpr when in C++ 11 constexpr mode (albeit usually with a
warning).
VS2015 will not be lenient. You get guaranteed as much constexpr as
is minimally required to implement C++ 11, anything past that is
gravy.
I've tried feeding test code into the unreleased full constexpr web
MSVC compiler and so far for me at least it's working. I would like
to assume someone in Microsoft has tried flipping BOOST_CONSTEXPR on
in Boost with their latest release, but maybe STL can tell us more on
that.
One ballsy move might be for Boost to turn on BOOST_CONSTEXPR
unilaterally for VS2015, and let the bug reports work their magic :)
Niall
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk