Re: [boost] [regression runner] Preference libstdc++ vs. libc++

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]>
wrote:

> 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
fingers crossed.

> 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.

degski