Subject: Re: [boost] expected/result/etc
From: Sam Kellett (samkellett_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-02-04 09:45:32
On 4 February 2016 at 13:45, Michael Marcin <mike.marcin_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 2/4/2016 7:06 AM, Sam Kellett wrote:
>>> Ordinarily yes. In this case however, the Boost-lite macros have the
>>> same effect as the Boost ones, so redefining them is mostly safe,
>>> albeit with annoying warnings.
>> that's obviously not true seeing as somebody hit this problem seemingly
>> almost immediately
> Eh? That's exactly what happened. Annoying warnings with no other issues.
sorry i don't think that came off how i meant it... what i mean is this is
kinda asking for trouble. what happens if the boost macro changes?
wouldn't something like this be better:
#define MY_XXX BOOST_XXX
#define MY_XXX /* boost_lite thing here */
redefining a macro in somebody else's 'namespace' is akin to opening up the
std namespace to redefine vector.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk