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

From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-09-18 00:20:27

On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 1:10 AM Joaquín M López Muñoz via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> 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?

Note that gcc supports push/pop pragmas only since gcc 4.6. Before
that you can't disable a warning without affecting the user's code
compilation.

I'm also not sure disabling the warning around a macro *definition* works.