Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Rethinking feature macros?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-06 10:40:44
On 11/06/17 04:15, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Now that there are standard feature-testing macros
> that are being implemented by at least g++ and clang++, would it perhaps
> make sense for us to reevaluate our decision to provide negative macros
> in Boost.Config and start defining the standard feature macros instead
> on the compilers that don't support them?
I think this is a bad idea. Boost.Config macros do not necessarilly
correspond to what the compiler defines. Compilers lie sometimes by
defining a macro while the corresponding feature is broken. Besides, I
believe this is not Boost's prerogative to define compiler and standard
Also, on the std-proposals list (IIRC) there was a discussion about SD-6
macros, and there were even initiatives to entirely drop the whole idea.
The future of SD-6 is not quite clear, IMHO. At least, library-specific
macros have very limited use and are prime candidates for changes or
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk