Subject: Re: [boost] [regression runner] Preference libstdc++ vs. libc++
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-09 14:51:35
On 9 March 2017 at 08:05, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> 7) If there is a mode by which clang/C2 does not use the broken emulation
> of the non-standard VC++ preprocessor, but instead implements clang's usual
> C++ standard preprocessor, as Peter Dimov has suggested, there is no Boost
> Build support for clang/C2 AFAICS to test this.
Yes, the option is there, it, Clang/LLVM, (supposedly) works like
Clang/LLVM on other platforms.
> 8) I am not willing to try to change Boost PP/VMD to work with clang's
> broken emulation of the non-standard VC++ preprocessor. If anyone else
> would like to do it, please go ahead. Getting Boost PP/VMD to work with the
> non-standard VC++ preprocessor was enough work, as I am pretty sure that
> Paul Mensonides who did that for Boost PP will attest also.
Microsoft has promised to strive and work towards a fully compliant PP, so
> This is what I mean when I say that clang/C2 is currently useless to me as
> someone who programs using Boost libraries.
I don't understand why you say that, as you would get better debugging
support, having the benefits of clang (plus GCC-extensions on Windows, if
one chooses to), while using the boost libs you built with VC.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk