Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Rethinking feature macros?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-06 15:32:40
Andrey Semashev wrote:
> I'm saying that having ~10 macros defined for g++-7 -std=c++17 is probably
> better than ~100 macros. And
having ~10 (other) macros defined for g++-15 -std=c++22 is yet better than
You're refuting your own argument, because if g++-15 would need 200 positive
macros compared to g++-7's 100, g++-7 would need 100 negative macros.
There is no point in time at which both can do with 10.
The good thing about positive macros is that an old compiler never needs
maintenance. With negative macros you have to keep adding them to it.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk