Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Style] Import a C function with wrong signature on purpose
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-02 16:22:42

On Monday, 2 May 2016 23:17:37 MSK Klemens Morgenstern wrote:
> Now of course, that would never be accepted into the boost/winapi
> module, but I could just add this in my library. Would this be a
> dealbreaker for a library attempting to become a boost-library? If so,
> I'd need to put it into a source file and include windows.h there, but
> I'd really like the library to be header-only and under no circumstances
> include windows.h there.

It's not just a question of style. This is likely break with a recent clang. Maybe
gcc, too. The compiler has to check that the same named functions with C
linkage are equivalent (i.e. receive the same arguments of the same type), and
this is not the case with enums. This is one reason why Boost.WinAPI is so

My guess is that unless you are able to avoid enums altogether, you have no
choice but to include windows.h. Maybe you could reduce the negative impact
of that by providing a way to build that part of your library separately.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at