Subject: Re: [boost] C++17 detection
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-09-14 14:36:42
On 9/14/17 2:27 AM, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
>>>> Boost.Config actually uses the feature testing macros when available
>>>> and when applicable (in combination with other things, i.e. an
>>>> understanding of what the C++ implementation in question actually is
>>>> known to support, regardless of what it advertises). Using the feature
>>>> testing macros alone may not be what you want.
>>> I'd be happy to used Boost.Config - that's where I looked first.Â But I
>>> don't see what I need in there.
>> Pull requests are welcome.
> Indeed, or file a feature request.
Hmmm - the problem is i'm already two interrupt levels below where I
really want to be. So I was hoping for an existing fix that I didn't
really have to think about. If something that starts out seeming
trivial often end up sucking up a bunch of unanticipated time.
> Note that historically Boost.Config has never added new macros unless
> there is demand from within Boost.
> And while it's true that we have been laggardly in adding C++17 feature
> macros, so far no one has ever asked for them either... not once till now.
> BTW, what I'm missing from this discussion, is exactly what C++17
> features you are actually interested in?
According to http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/experimental/is_detected
it's currently in <experimental/type_traits> as part of library
fundamentals v2. I had mistakenly thought it was slated for C++17. So
maybe it's not appropriate to include in Boost.Config yet.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk