Re: [preprocessor] Dropping support for compilers that do not implement variadic macros

From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-17 22:44:07

On 9/17/2020 6:10 PM, Joaquín M López Muñoz via Boost wrote:
> 
> 
>> Em 17 de set de 2020, Ã (s) 23:09, Edward Diener via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> escreveu:
>>
>> On 9/15/2020 7:13 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
>>> Edward Diener wrote:
>>>>> Which compilers will be affected?
>>>>
>>>> Right now these compilers are considered by PP to not support variadic macros:
>>>>
>>>> gccxml
>>>> nvcc when cuda is being used
>>>> PathScale
>>>> Digital Mars and Symantec C++
>>>> bcc32
>>>> metrowerks
>>>> sun/oracle C++ < version 5.12 ( current oracle C++ version is 12.6 )
>>>> HP aC++ when not using EDG
>>>> MPW C++
>>>> PGI when not using EDG
>>> This doesn't sound that bad, as most of these compilers are dead, although I hope nvcc does support variadic macros nowadays.
>>
>> I did discover that if gcc or clang is compiled at the C++03 level with -pedantic there will be a ton of warnings, and if with -pedantic-errros there will be a ton of errors for those warnings.
> 
> Don’t warning disabling pragmas *around preprocessor definitions* solve the issue?

They could but I would have to know when it is gcc or clang and when it 
is at the C+03 level. Compilers, including gcc, are notorious for not 
setting __cplusplus correctly, to determine C++03, and lots of compilers 
define __clang__ or __gnuc__. But you are theoretically correct and I 
will look at that.