Re: [boost] [config] Rethinking feature macros?

Subject: Re: [boost] [config] Rethinking feature macros?
From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-06 15:59:26

On 11/06/17 18:32, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> 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 ~200.
> 
> 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.

g++-7 will be out of wide use by then, so it doesn't matter.

> 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.

That is not more maintenance than adding positive macros for newer 
compilers.